#"
*#(+$ *+3
;"
)#* )
0&$
'
*+
#(
))#C
*#(+$ *+
+#
/.
* (*.).'
('
+
.
+ +.
'.+.$
(.
+
+
+
.$.
/$. *
#"
*#(+$ *+
+
.
!.( )+
.
%
/.
$.'&*.'
/&+
(#+
+#
).
+
(
3M
#"
+
.
2 )&.
#"
+
.
) ('3
#(+ *+
+
.
!) ((
(,
'.! $+ .(+
+#
#/+
(
("#$ +
#(
#(
$.?&
$. .(+
"#$
.(+.$
(,
(+#
>
))
#(
*+
*#(+$ *+
('
+
.
&
.
))#C.'3
8#* )
,#2.$( .(+
&(
"#$
$&).
('
+
.
!.*
"
*
>
))
#(
*+
*#(+$ *+
* (
/.
#$.
$.
+$
*+
2. +
(
+
.
>
))
#(
*+
D#2.$( .(+
#'.
!$#2
#(
3 9#$
#$.
("#$ +
#(
*#(+ *+
+
.
.! $+ .(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(
2 #(
#"
8 ('
.
#&$*.
1$#+.*+
#(
+
#$
2 +
+
C./
+.
++!
BCCC3*#(
.$2 +
#(3* 3,#2')$!)* 3
)+ &$* ' *3$ -&2
1$ (
>
)'"
$.
'$ +
* ))%
)+.$
+
.
+.$$
(
('
,$#&('
*#('
+
#(
3 1#
+
C
)'"
$.
$
(
+#$
* (
!$#'&*.
' (,.$#&
")
")##'
&'
)
'.
('
'./$
")#C
3
.
.
.2.(+
$.
+
$. +
+#
!$#!.$+%
)#* +.'
C
+
(
#$
)#(,
(
$.
C
*
.6!.$
.(*.'
$.*.(+
C
)'"
$.3
'2
#$%
!$#2
'.'
+#
!)%
("#$
%#&
/#&+
+
.
D.#)#,
*
&$2.% 4
!
+
+
.
+
+.
+
.
!$#/ /
)
+%
('
2#)& .
#"
'./$
")#C
+
+
%
/.
!$#'&*.'
/%
+#$
(
$.*.(+)%
/&$(.'
$. 3
.%
$.
2 ) /).
+B
.$.
%
/.
''
+
#( )
#$
&!' +.'
!
('
$.
#&$*.
2 ) /).3
#
..@
"&$+
.$
("#$ +
#(
/#&+
!#
/).
&'
)
'.
('
'./$
")#C
$.
+
+
%
"".*+
+
.
!$#!.$+%
*#(+ *+
+
.
#&(+%
1) ((
(,
.! $+ .(+3
CCC3&
,
3,#2( +&$ )
- $'
) ('
)
'.
- $'
*
.(*.. .$,.(*%
.
.(+!#
+"
$.'./$
")#C
- $'
Q
?+
*
.(*. *.(+.$ #/0.*+
RP?+
*
.(*. *.(+.$ #/0.*+
$& 0
2*&& K )*
!
*
1$ (
)
"#$(
4 #
)
('
,
!$#'&*+
#(
/..(
(
'.*)
(.
(*.
+
.
4
('
C.))
(%
#"
C
*
C.$.
'$
)).'
+
+
.
+&$(
#"
+
.
!
+
*.(+&$%
2. /..(
&+
'#C(
#$
!$#!.$)%
/ ('#(.'3
&*
C.))
$.
#"+.(
"#&('
C
.(
+
.%
/.,
(
+#
). @
#
)
( +&$ )
,
5 .+
(.7
#$
C +.$3
H&
)'
(,
*#(
+$&*+
#(
(
+
.
!
+
.2.$ )
%. $
.6! ('.'
(+#
$.
C
.$.
C.))
C.$.
#(*.
#$
$.
*+
2.3 H&%.$
#&)'
/.
C $.
+
+
C.))
%
.6
+
#(
#$
(. $
(%
!$#!.$+%
('
(.C
*#(
+$&*+
#(
%
)
#
/.
$.
+$
*+.'
(
+
.
2 *
(
+%
#"
C.))
3
.
)
"#$(
2 #(
#"
)
D
('
D.#+
.$ )
.
#&$*.
'
(
+.$
+
.
!$#,$
+#
!$#!.$)%
/ ('#(
C.))
3 / ('#(.'
#$
*+
2. #
)
C.))
$.
*#(+
(
(,
!.+$#).&
'.!#
+
#
)
"
.)'
) ('"
))
('
,
+#$ ,.
" *
)
+
.
*#&)'
!$.
.(+
$
@
('
".+%
- $'
+#
)
".
. )+
('
( +&$ )
$.
#&$*.
3
@
*#&)'
(*)&'.
/&+
$.
(#+
)
+.'
+#
#
)
('
,$#&('
C +.$
*#(+
( +
#(
!
%
* )
".+%
- $'
+#
& (
('
(
)
"
$.
- $'
#
)
('
.+
(.
..!
('
$
?& )
+%
!$#/).
3 :
,$ +
#(
#"
.+
(.
,
(+#
$.
*#(+
(
(,
!.$ . /).
&$" *.
5 3.3
*#(*$.+.
! 2. .(+
/
. .(+
.+*37
* (
+$ !
+
.
,
$.
&)+
(,
(
+
.
**& &) +
#(
#"
,
*#(*.(+$ +
#(
3 )+
#&,
( +&$ )
.+
(.
,
$.) +
2.)%
$ ).
,
*#(*.(+$ +
#(
#"
+
* (
/.
- $'#&
'&.
+#
+
,
)%
*# /&
+
/).
*
.
* )
*# !#
+
#(
C.))
+
/
)
+%
+#
'
!) *.
#6%,.(3
1$#!.$+
.
)#* +.'
(
.+
(.
-#(.
%
/.
$.?&
$.'
+#
&('.$,#
+.
+
(,
('
+
, +
#(3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*# .('
+
+
+
.
/&%.$
*#(+ *+
+
.
)#* )
1) ((
(,
H&
)'
(,
('
".+%
.! $+ .(+
+#
*.$+
(
C
+
!$.2
#&
.
&$.
"
(%
,
+
2. /..(
+ @.(
+#
!$#!.$)%
2.(+
+
.
$.
('
C
+
*#(
'.$ +
#(
,
+
!!)%
$., $'
(,
/&
)'
(,
!.$
+
#$
$.(#2 +
#(
3 9#$
#$.
("#$ +
#(
('
!
2 +
++!
BCCC3*#(
.$2 +
#(3* 3,#2'#,
('
++!
BCCC3*#(
.$2 +
#(3* 3,#2'#,1 ,.
>.))9
('.$3
!63
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000503
!
3$
* $
$1$
(
*
' *
0** *$*
1$ (
.
)
"#$(
(' (,.$.'
!.*
.
*+
9 ('
D .
#'.
.*+
#(
+ +.
+
+
+
.$.
$.
*.$+
(
!.*
.
#"
"
C
)')
".
('
!) (+
+
+
$.
(
' (,.$
#"
#$
+
$. +.(.'
C
+
.6+
(*+
#(
/.* &
.
+
.
$
/
+ +
$.
/.
(,
+
$. +.(.'
'.
+$#%.'
#$
'2.$
.)%
#'
"
.'3
8.,
) +
#(
'.*) $.
+
+
) ('#C(.$
*##!.$ +
#(
.
.(+
)
"#$
*#(
.$2 +
#(
#(
+
#
.
) ('
+
+
2. /..(
'.(+
"
.'
/
+ +
"#$
.(' (,.$.'
#$
+
$. +.(.'
!.*
.
3 **#$'
(,
+#
.*+
#(
3
#"
+
.
9 ('
D .
#'.
"
!.$
#(
(..'
+#
''$.
+
, +
#(
.
&$.
(
$.) +
#(
+#
! $+
*&) $
! *+
#(
+
$. +.(.'
!.*
.
+
.(
+
#
.
.
&$.
C
))
/.
$#&,
)%
!$#!#$+
#( )
+#
+
.
! *+
+
+
+
.
!.$
#(
#(
+
#
.
!.*
.
3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*# .('
+
.
/&%.$
*#(+ *+
+
.
)#* )
!) ((
(,
'.! $+ .(+
('
+
.
)
"#$(
.! $+ .(+
#"
9 G
>
)')
".
+#
*.$+
(
C
+
"
(%
*#(
'.$ +
#(
,
+
/.
(2#)2.'
$.
&)+
#"
/.
(,
(
#$
(. $/%
/
+ +
.(
+
2. $.
3 ''
+
#( )
("#$ +
#(
2 ) /).
+
++!
BCCC3C
)')
".3* 3,#2#(
.$2 +
#(3
+
&&( +$0
3*
1$ (
/.
+#
+
.
*# #(
( .
"#$
,$#&!
#"
)
* +.
(.$ )
+
+
$.
'.
#"
+
(
+$#(,
"
/.$
3 ;+
#**&$
( +&$ ))%
(
*.$+
(
,.#)#,
*
.++
(,
(
)
"#$(
#
+
*# #()%
(
&)+$ /
*
('
&)+$ "
*
$#*@
(*)&'
(,
.$!.(+
(.
$#*@3
.
.
$#*@
$.
*# #()%
"#&('
(
+
.
.$$
9##+
))
+
.
) +
:#&(+
(
#
+
(,.
('
)#(,
# .
" &)+
3 >
).
/.
+#
#$.
)
@.)%
"#&('
(
+
.
.
$#*@
"#$ +
#(
+
!$.
.(*.
(#+
*.$+
(3
H.* &
.
/.
+#
(.$ )
/.
+#
"
/.$
$.
,.(.$ ))%
+ /).
(
+
.
( +&$ )
.(2
$#( .(+3
.
"
/.$
C
))
(#+
.2 !#$ +.
(+#
+
.
$3
# .
( +&$ ))%
#**&$$
(,
/.
+#
* (
/.*# .
"$
/).
#$
*$&
.'
(+#
!#C'.$3
%
#**&$
C
.(
2. *).
'$
2. #2.$
&(! 2.'
$# '
#$
'$
2.C %
+
+
$.
&$" *.'
C
+
&)+$ /
*
&)+$ "
*
#$
.$!.(+
(.
$#*@
C
.(
) ('
,$ '.'
"#$
/&
)'
(,
!&$!#
.
#$
+
?& $$%
(,
#!.$ +
#(
3 >. +
.$
(,
('
.$#
#(
%
)
#
( +&$ ))%
$.).
.
/.
+#
3 9$
/).
/.
+#
* (
/.*# .
&
!.('.'
(
+
.
$
('
&('.$
+
.
.
*#('
+
#(
/.
+#
"
/.$
$.!$.
.(+
,(
"
* (+
$
@
+#
& (
. )+
3
/.
+#
@(#C(
* $*
(#,.(
('
(
) +
#(
#"
/.
+#
%
$.
&)+
(
+
.
'.2.)#! .(+
#"
)&(,
* (*.$3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*# .('
+
+
+
.
/&%.$
2 +
+
.
)
"#$(
.! $+ .(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(
2 #(
#"
:
(.
('
D.#)#,%
C./
+.
"#$
"&$+
.$
("#$ +
#(
('
!
+
++!
BCCC3*#(
.$2 +
#(3* 3,#2*,
1 ,.
- $'#&
:
(.$ )
/.
+#
3 !6
1$ (
'#(
*#)#$).
#'#$).
$ '
# *+
2. ,
+
+
!$#'&*.'
/%
+
.
( +&$ )
'.* %
#"
&$ (
&
C
*
"#&('
(
(. $)%
))
#
)
('
$#*@
3 '#(
* (
..!
"$#
+
.
,$#&('
(+#
+
.
$
(
!$#!.$+%
+
$#&,
#!.(
(,
(
+
.
,$#&('
('
+
!$.
.(*.
(*$.
.
+
.
$
@
#"
)&(,
* (*.$3
'#(
).2.)
$.
2 $
/).
('
%
/.
(")&.(*.'
/%
(#+
#()%
,.#)#,%
/&+
)
#
#
)
!.$ . /
)
+%
C. +
.$
('
*)
+
*
*#('
+
#(
/&
)'
(,
'.
,(
*#('
+
#(
('
&
,.3
.
(2
$#( .(+ )
1$#+.*+
#(
,.(*%
517
!$#'&*.'
!
+
+
,(
#(.
#"
+
$..
-#(.
'.
,( +
#(
+#
. *
*#&(+%
/
.'
#(
$ '#(
!#+.(+
)
('
. *
-#(.
'.
,( +
#(
$.").*+
+
.
2.$ ,.
#$++.$
$ '#(
.
&$. .(+
+
+
* (
/.
.6!.*+.'
+#
/.
.
&$.'
(
/&
)'
(,
C
+
#&+
+
.
!). .(+ +
#(
#"
$ '#(
*#(+$#)
.+
#'
3
+
!
(#+
. (+
+#
/.
&
.'
+#
'.+.$
(.
C
.+
.$
! $+
*&) $
!$#!.$+%
#&)'
/.
+.
+.'
"#$
$ '#(
/&+
&
.'
+#
+
2 $
#&
,#2.$( .(+
,.(*
.
('
#$, (
- +
#(
(
"#*&
(,
+
.
$
$ '#(
!$#,$
$.
#&$*.
3 1$#!.$+
.
C
+
,
).2.)
#"
$ '#(
2. /..(
"#&('
(
))
-#(.
3 8#(,+.$
5&!
+#
#(.
%. $7
.
&$. .(+
,.(.$ ))%
$.*# .('.'
"#$
+
.
#
+
**&$ +.
'.+.$
( +
#(
#"
$ '#(
).2.)
3 '#(
+.
+
(,
""#$' /).
('
.
)%
'#(.3
.
+
@
+
$.
2 ) /).
+
+
.
)
"#$(
.! $+ .(+
#"
1&/)
*
. )+
C./
+.
+
++!
BCCC3*'!
3* 3,#21$#,$
:1 ,.
:H '#( '#(.
+
(,3
!63
*
>
>>
"
3
;"
+
.
$ '#(
).2.)
,$. +.$
+
(
!
*#&$
.
!.$
8 +.$
#"
$
5!
87
+
.
1
&,,.
+
$. .'
+
#(3
''
+
#( ))%
+
.
)
"#$(
.! $+ .(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(
#&+)
(.
'#(
=#(.
$.
C
.$.
,.#)#,
*
*#('
+
#(
$.
)
@.)%
+#
!$#'&*.
,
#'.$ +.
#$
)#C
!#+.(+
)
('##$
$ '#(
).2.)
/#2.
!
83
#
.
!
$.
2 ) /).
+
++!
BCCC3.! 3,#2$ '#("
('
("#$ +
#( /#&+)#* )$ '#(-#(.
('
+ +.*#(+ *+
("#$ +
#(
('
++!
BCCC3*#(
.$2 +
#(3* 3,#2*,
1 ,.
- $'#&
:
(.$ )
$ '#( 3
!6 3
01*)*
& 0+$*
7* $*
$
& *1$)*
& !
,
0+$* - !)*2* !)*3+(* &
&
*
;P
7
*
(+ -
)$&( -) &*
$ (+ !)*; +3&$ !* 3(
!* *1$)*
&
*
$
0*(
$$0 $)
$-)
$ *0
$0 *1$)*
& !
,
&
*
--*
$0 * $*
$
& *
(
1 $&
3&* - 2&
!
''222 $ & +* +* )'2&
%
!
''222 $ & +* +* )'2&
<&*
%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000504
$ &
$)* 6
1
9
;
1
HE
E
1
;
D:
H
H
HE
88
9
:
;;
8;:;;
9
8;H;8;E
;3
;
D:
H
H
HE
:
;;
8;:;;
8;H;8;E
;
:
D8
9
>
1
1;D
;D
1
1;
9
13
!$ *
$
2
(
&$( - $ +
*
*)
$
$
@ .
/
K.*
!
.(+5
7L
))
. (
('
$.".$
+#
+$ (
".$#$ 5
7
.)).$5
7
+$ (
".$..5
7/&%.$5
7
('
+
.
$
$.
!.*+
2. ,.(+5
7/$#@.$5
7 C
#
**.
*#!%
#"
+
.!#$+3
D
K.!#$+L
))
. (
('
$.".$
+#
(%
'
*)#
&$.
.!#$+
!$.! $.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
('
'.
2 ) /).
+#
+
.
.*
!
.(+ 5
7
C
.+
.$
+
.
.!#$+
!$#2
'.'
$'
*#!%
2 .
)
#$
**.
.'
2 ++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*#
C
.
("#$ +
#(
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.!#$+
(+.('.'
"#$
+
.
.6*)&
2. /.(."
+
('
&
.
#"
+
.
.*
!
.(+ 5
73 #
!.$
#(
#+
.$
+
(
+
.
.*
!
.(+ 5
7 #&)'
$.)%
&!#(
$.".$
+#
#$
&
.
+
.!#$+
#$
(%
("#$ +
#(
*#(+
(.'
C
+
(
+
.!#$+
"#$
(%
!&$!#
.3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
.6!$.
)%
'
*)
))
)
/
)
+%
(*)&'
(,
)
/
)
+%
"#$
/$. *
#"
*#(+$ *+
('
(.,)
,.(*.
+#
!.$
#(
#+
.$
+
(
.*
!
.(+ 5
73
.
'
*)#
&$.
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.!#$+
K
))
(#+
/.
&
.'
/%
(%
#+
.$
! $+%
(*)&'
(,
/&+
(#+
)
+.'
+#
(
&$ (*.
*# ! (
.
).('.$
#$
,#2.$( .(+ )
,.(*
.
"#$
(%
!&$!#
.3L
)
"#$(
2 )
#'.
.*+
#(
3 5,73
J 8
8
>8
$
>
.)).$5
7 ('
+
.
$
,.(+5
7 $.
('.!.('.(+)%
$.?&
$.'
+#
@.
*.$+
(
+ +&+#$%
'
*)#
&$.
#"
))
+.$
)
" *+
/#&+
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
C
+
(
+
.
$
*+& )
@(#C).',.3
.!#$+
'#.
(#+
)+.$
*
(,.
! *+
"".*+
#$
$.!) *.
.)).$
#$
.)).$ 4
,.(+4
('.!.('.(+
'
*)#
&$.
#/)
, +
#(
3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
*@(#C).',.
+
+
+
.$.
%
/.
#+
.$
'
*)#
&$.
$.?&
$.'
&('.$
!!)
* /).
+ +.
) C
(' #$
C
+
(
.)).$4
('
.)).$4
,.(+4
*+& )
@(#C).',.
('
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
@.
(#
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
+#
+
.
'.?& *%
#$
**&$ *%
#"
(%
#+
.$
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
#$
'
*)#
&$.
'.
&('.$
!!)
* /).
+ +.
) C3
A *L ?
&
5 7 + +&+#$%
('
8#* )&!!). .(+ )
*)#
&$.
#+
*.
('
'2
#$
.
.
!&$!#
.
#"
+
.
*)#
&$.
.!#$+
+#
+
+
.
.*
!
.(+5
7 (
(#+
"%
(,
+
.
!$#
!.*+
2. /&%.$
C
.+
.$
+
.
!$#!.$+%
)#* +.'
(
(%
#"
6 + +&+#$
)%
'."
(.'
( +&$ )
- $'
$.
3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
)
#
#/+
(.'
!
+
+
$.
/#+
#""
*
)
('
!&/)
*)%
2 ) /).
"$#
*
+%
*#&(+%
('
+ +.
#&$*.
C
*
&!!). .(+
+
( +&$ )
- $'
("#$ +
#(3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
)
#
!$#2
'
(,
'
*)#
&$.
(#+
*.
('
'2
#$
.
#(
!#+.(+
))%
- $'#&
*#('
+
#(
#$
#**&$$.(*.
+
+
%
"".*+
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%3
.
.
''
+
#( )
'
*)#
&$.
(#+
*.
('
'2
#$
.
$.
.
+
.$
$.?&
$.'
/%
+
.
)
"#$(
2 )
#'.
)#* )
#$'
( (*.
#$
+
.
("#$ +
#(
$. '
)%
2 ) /).3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*# .('
*#(+ *+
(,
+
.
)#* )
/&
)'
(,
('
!) ((
(,
'.! $+ .(+
!$
#$
+#
+
.
+$ (
".$
+#
.)!
*.$+
(
C
+
"
(%
''
+
#( )
$.?&
$. .(+
+
.$.
,
+
/.
"#$
*#(
+$&*+
#(
#$
$.(#2 +
#(
('
/&
)'
(,
*#'.
$.?&
$. .(+
"#$
+
!$#!.$+%3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
!.$"#$ .'
2 & )
#$
!
%
* )
(
!.*+
#(
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%3
.!#$+
(#+
&/
+
+&+.
"#$
2 & )
#$
!
%
* )
(
!.*+
#(
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%
#$
,.#)#,
*
#$
.(,
(..$
(,
+&'% 3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
& .
(#
$.
!#(
/
)
+%
"#$
(%
*#
+
#$
*#(
.?&.(*.
'
$.*+
#$
('
$.*+
$
(,
'&.
+#
+
.
(..'
#$
+
.
) *@
#"
(..'
"#$
. $+
?& @.
(
&$ (*.
"
$.
(
&$ (*.
#$
")##'
- $'
(
&$ (*.3
(
,.(+
"#$
+
.
9.'.$ )
9)##'
;(
&$ (*.
1$#,$
#&)'
/.
*#(+ *+.'
+#
'.+.$
(.
+
.
*+& )
(..'
"#$
")##'
- $'
(
&$ (*.3
;(
#$'.$
+#
!$.! $.
+
.!#$+
.
+
.$
+
.
.)).$
5#$
.$
,.(+7
#$
+
.
/&%.$
5#$
.$
,.(+7
&!!)
.'
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
C
+
+
.
.
#$ 4
1 $*.)
& /.$
5K1L7
"#$
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
2.$
"
.'
+
.
**&$ *%
#"
+
.
13
.!#$+
C
!$.! $.'
/
.'
&!#(
&*
1
('
))
(#+
('
'#.
(#+
(*)&'.
(%
!$#!.$+%
/.%#('
+
.
/#&(' $
.
#"
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
'.(+
"
.'
/%
&*
1
(*)&'
(,
/&+
(#+
)
+.'
+#
(%
*# #(
(+.$.
+
$.
+$&*+&$.
5C
.+
.$
)#* +.'
#(
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
#$
(#+ 7
.
. .(+
#$
(%
$
,
+
+
+).
(+.$.
+
.
+ +.
#$
.
. .(+
(
(%
/&++
(,
+$..+
$# '
)).%
) (.
C %
#$
C +.$C %
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
(#+
/.
$.
!#(
/).
#$
)
/).
"#$
(%
)#
.
)
/
)
+
.
#$
' ,.
$.
&)+
(,
"$#
(
(*#$$.*+
13
#
'.+.$
( +
#(
'.
('
(#
#!
(
#(
.6!$.
.'
#$
(+.('.'
/%
+
.!#$+
*#(*.$(
(,
C
.+
.$
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
*# !$
.'
#"
)., )
)#+
(
*#("#$ (*.
C
+
+
.
)
"#$(
&/'
2 #(
: !
*+3
;"
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
! $+
#"
*#('#
(
&
!$#0.*+
!) ((.'
&(
+
'.2.)#! .(+
#$
#+
.$
!$#!.$+
.
C
+
*# #(
#$
&('
2 '.'
(+.$.
+
$.
+
.
.!#$+
%
('
* +.
+
+
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
C
+
(
+
.
( +&$ )
- $'
-#(.
"
(%
!#$+
#(
#"
+
.
*# #(
#$
&('
2 '.'
(+.$.
+
$.
C
+
(
+
.
$.!#$+.'
( +&$ )
- $'
-#(.3
;(
!$.! $
(,
+
.!#$+
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.2
.C.'
('
$.)
.'
&!#(
+
.
+ +&+.
'.(+
"
.'
('
$.2
.C.'
+
.
$.*#$'
$.".$$.'
+#
(
. *
'.+.$
( +
#(3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000505
5/7 6
;("#$ +
#(
"
(*)&'.'
(
+
.
$.!#$+
)
"#$(
2 )
#'.
$.?&
$.
+
+
+
.
.)).$
#"
*.$+
(
$. )
!$#!.$+%
'.+.$
(.
"$#
)#* )
,.(*
.
C
.+
.$
+
.
!$#!.$+%
&/0.*+
+#
:.))# ##
# &(
+%
9 *
)
+
.
*+
('
!.*
)
6
.
.(+
('
"
#
'.)
2.$
(#+
*.
#"
&*
!.*
)
+ 6
.
.(+ 5
7 +#
+
.
!$#
!.*+
2. /&%.$3
.
!&$!#
.
#"
+
.
!.*
)
6
('
.
.(+
.*+
#(
$.
+#
5 7
@.
!$.)
( $%
'.+.$
( +
#(
$., $'
(,
C
.+
.$
.*&$.'
+ 6
$#))
*#(+
(
:.))#
##
# &(
+%
9 *
)
+
.
+$
*+
!.*
)
6.
#$
; !$#2. .(+
H#('
*+
#"
8 .(
.
.(+
,
(
+
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
('
5/7
+
+
.
.)).$
(
"&)"
))
(,
.$
'&+%
+#
*# !)%
C
+
)
"#$(
2 )
#'.
.*+
#(
3/3
>
.(
!$.! $
(,
+
.
!.*
)
6
('
.
.(+
.*+
#(
+
.
# ! (%
$.2
.C.'
*#&(+%
+ 6
$.*#$'
('
#+
.$
#""
*
)
('
+
$'
! $+%
$.
#&$*.
+#
'.+.$
(.
C
.+
.$
**#$'
(,
+#
+
#
.
$.*#$'
+
.
!$#!.$+%
&/0.*+
+#
!.*
)
6
!&$
& (+
+#
+
.
:.))# ##
# &(
+%
9 *
)
+
.
*+
#$
!.*
)
.
.(+
!&$
& (+
+#
+
.
; !$#2. .(+
H#('
*+
#"
3
()%
.
.(+
+
+
C.$.
).2
.'
,
(
+
+
.
!$#!.$+%
+
+
.
+
.
+
.
# ! (%
#/+
(.'
+
.
+ 6
$.*#$'
$.
'
*)#
.'3
#
+&'%
#"
+
.
!&/)
*
$.*#$'
C
'.
/%
+
.
# ! (%
+#
'.+.$
(.
+
.
!$.
.(*.
#"
(%
#+
.$
+ 6
#$
.
.(+3
;+.
(#+
%.+
).2
.'
#(
+
.
+ 6
/
))
+.
(#+
!!. $
(,
#(
+
.
+ 6
/
))
/.* &
.
+
.
*&$$.(+
#C(.$
!!)
.'
"#$
(
2 ) /).
.6. !+
#(
&!!). .(+ )
+ 6.
&(
.*&$.'
!$#!.$+%
+ 6.
('
+.
$. #2.'
"$#
+
.
+ 6
/
))
'&.
+#
!.('
(,
0&'
*
)
"#$.*)#
&$.
&
+
%
(#+
/.
$.").*+.'
#(
+
.!#$+3
.
#&(+
#"
+
.
).2%
.('
(,
%. $
('
#+
.$
+ 6
("#$ +
#(
%
/.
&/0.*+
+#
*
(,.
(
+
.
"&+&$.3
6
("#$ +
#(
* (
2 $%
"$#
!$#!.$+%
+#
!$#!.$+%3
.
+ 6
('
.
.(+
("#$ +
#(
(
+
.!#$+
"#$
+
.
!.*
"
*
+
.
"$ .
('
!$#!.$+%
$.".$.(*.'
('
%
(#+
/.
&
.'
"#$
#+
.$
!$#!.$+
.
3
.
# ! (%
(#+
$.
!#(
/).
"#$
(%
*
(,.
+
+
%
#**&$3
;(
# .
(
+ (*.
5 (*)&'
(,
# .
*#('#
#/
).
# .
('
(.C
&/'
2 #(
7
+
.
+ 6
$#))
' +
'
*)#
.'
%
$.!$.
.(+
+
.
#&(+
.
.'
"#$
(
.(+
$.
! $*.)
!$
#$
+#
&/'
2 #(
#"
'
! $*.)3
.!#$+
('
+
.
/#2.
.6!) ( +
#(
#"
!.*
)
6
('
.
.(+
$.
(+.('.'
+#
/.
,.(.$ )
(
( +&$.
('
(#+
&/
+
+&+.
"#$
+ 6
/
))
+
+).
$.!#$+
#$
+
+).
(
&$ (*.
('
%
(#+
/.
$.)
.'
&!#(
&*
3 ;"
'.+
).'
("#$ +
#(
'.
$.'
+
.
# ! (%
$.*# .('
*#(+ *+
(,
+
.
,.(*%
+
+
'
(
+.$
+
.
!.*
)
6
('
.
.(+
#$
$.+
(
(,
!$#".
#( )
*#(
&)+ (+3
.
# ! (%
/.)
.2.
+
+
+
.
("#$ +
#(
('
' +
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.!#$+
*#$$.*+
/&+
C.
'#
(#+
,& $ (+..
+
.
**&$ *%
#"
#&(+%
$.*#$'
#$
+
.
$.*#$'
#"
H#('
'
(
+$ +#$
"$#
C
*
+
("#$ +
#(
/
.'
#$
**.!+
)
/
)
+%
"#$
"&+&$.
+ 6
! % .(+
(
+
.
.2.(+
+
.
("#$ +
#(
( **&$ +.
(*# !).+.
#$
#&+' +.'3
.
.
.'
).2%
#&(+
)
+.'
$.
!$#2
'.'
/%
+
.
6
#)).*+#$N
#""
*.
('
$.
**&$ +.
/
.'
#(
+
.
).2
.
)
+.'
(
+
.
'.(+
"
.'
+ 6
$.*#$'
#"
+
.
/.,
((
(,
#"
+
.
'.(+
"
.'
+ 6
%. $3
#
'.+.$
( +
#(
'.
('
(#
#!
(
#(
.6!$.
.'
#$
(+.('.'
/%
+
.
.!#$+
*#(*.$(
(,
+
.
.6
+.(*.
#"
!$#!.$+%
+ 6
)
/
)
+
.
&().
!.*
"
* ))%
'.
*$
/.'
(
+
.
.!#$+3
.
!!)
* /).
*#&(+%
+ 6
.
#$*#)).*+#$
&!' +.
+
.
$
6
.
.(+
"$.?&.(+)%
('
+
.
# ! (%
&!' +.
+
.
$
6
.
.(+
("#$ +
#(
%. $)%3
;"
%#&$
'.*
#(
+#
!&$*
.
+
!$#!.$+%
/
.'
(
! $+
#(
("#$ +
#(
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.!#$+
+
.
# ! (%
$.*# .('
%#&
*#(+ *+
+
.
#&(+%
6
#)).*+#$ 4
#""
*.
('
+
.
H#('
'
(
+$ +#$
+#
2.$
"%
+
**&$ *%3
5*7 (2
$#( .(+ )
;("#$ +
#(
"
(*)&'.'
(
+
.
$.!#$+
.
.(2
$#( .(+ )
("#$ +
#(
5 (*)&'
(,
$.".$.(*.
'
7 +
+
.
.)).$ 5
7 (
+
"%
(,
+
.
$
,.(.$ )
#/)
, +
#(
+#
!$#2
'.
("#$ +
#(
$., $'
(,
+
.
!$#!.$+% 4
!$#6
+%
+#
+.5
7 '.(+
"
.'
/%
!!$#!$
+.
#&(+%
+ +.
('#$
9.'.$ )
,.(*
.
N
' + /
.
!#
.
(,
5. +
.$
!$.
.(+)%
#$
+#$
* ))%7
(
.(2
$#( .(+ )
*#(*.$(3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
2.$
"
.'
+
.
**&$ *%
2 )
'
+%
#$
*# !).+.(.
#"
+
#
.
)
+
('
'#.
(#+
(
&$.
C $$ (+
#$
,& $ (+..
+
+
+
.%
$.
**&$ +.
('
&!
+#
' +.3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
!.$"#$ .'
!
%
* )
(
!.*+
#(
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%
('
+
.
.!#$+
(#+
(+.('.'
+#
/.
&
.'
!$.)
( $%
+.
.
.(+
#$
1 .
$.!#$+3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
'#.
(#+
@.
(%
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
+#
+
.
. )+
- $'
+#
& (
#$
(
)
+
+
%
/.
#*
+.'
C
+
(%
#"
+
.
&/
+ (*.
+
+
%
.6
+
+
+
.
+.
#$
#C
+
.%
%
"".*+
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
'#.
(#+
$.!#$+
#(
+
.
,(
"
* (*.
#$
.6+.(+
#"
+
.
*#(+
( +
#(
#$
$. .'
+
#(
#"
(%
#"
+
.
+.
'.(+
"
.'
(
+
.
,.(*
.
N
' + /
.
3 F .
/
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
!$#2
'.
+
.
.!#$+
"#$
+
.
/.(."
+
#"
))
.*
!
.(+ 5
73
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
*#(
'.$
.*
!
.(+ 5
7 +#
/.
*#(+$ *+
(,
! $+%
C
#
&/0.*+
+#
+
.
.6!) ( +
#(
#"
.$2
*.
*#('
+
#(
)
+ +
#(
('
'
*)
.$
.$.
(
('
/%
,(
(,
+
.
.!#$+
.*
!
.(+ 5
7 .6!$.
)%
,$..
+#
$.*.
2. +
.
.$2
*.
('
/.
/#&('
/%
+
.
*#('
+
#(
)
+ +
#(
('
'
*)
.$
.$.
(3
.!#$+
"#$
+
.
.6*)&
2. /.(."
+
#"
+
.
.*
!
.(+ 5
73
.$.
))
/.
(#
+
$'
! $+%
/.(."
*
$
.
('
+
.
.!#$+
%
(#+
/.
&
.'
(
(%
&/
.?&.(+
+$ (
*+
#(
"".*+
(,
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%
#$
"#$
(%
#+
.$
$. )
!$#!.$+%3
G & &
5 7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
!$.! $.'
+
.!#$+
#).)%
/
.'
&!#(
$.*#$'
('
("#$ +
#(
!$#2
'.'
/%
2 $
#&
,#2.$( .(+ )
('
!$
2 +.
,.(*
.
3 )+
#&,
$.
#( /).
* $.
/..(
.6.$*
.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(
*# !
)
(,
+
.
' +
('
("#$ +
#(
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.
.!#$+
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
& .'
+
+
+
.
.
$.*#$'
('
("#$ +
#(
$.
**&$ +.
('
*# !).+.
('
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
*#('&*+.'
(%
('.!.('.(+
2.$
"
* +
#(
#"
+
.
$
**&$ *%
#$
*# !).+.(.
3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
(#+
/.
)
/).
+#
.*
!
.(+ 5
7 "#$
.$$#$
( **&$ *
.
#$
#
#(
(
+
.!#$+
"
&*
.$$#$
( **&$ *
.
#$
#
#(
C.$.
/
.'
&!#(
("#$ +
#(
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.
!&/)
*
('
!$
2 +.
$.*#$'
&
.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
#$
C.$.
@(#C(
+#
.6
+
/%
.*
!
.(+ 5
7 #(
+
.
' +.
#"
'.)
2.$%
#"
+
.!#$+
+#
.*
!
.(+5
73 5/7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
.6!$.
)%
.6*)&'.
"$#
)
/
)
+%
(%
'
*)#
&$.
#$
("#$ +
#(
5 7
(#+
@(#C(
+#
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
5 7
(#+
#(
+
.
!
&
.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
5 7
(#+
$.*#$'.'
(
+
.
!&/)
*
$.*#$'
#"
+
.
' +.
+
C
$.2
.C.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
5 27
(#+
(*)&'.'
(
+
.
* +.,#$
.
(*)&'.'
(
+
.
*)#
&$.
.!#$+
527
C
*
C#&)'
/.
'
*#2.$.'
/%
!
%
* )
(
!.*+
#(
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%
52 7
@(#C(
+#
(%
.*
!
.(+
!$
#$
+#
$.*.
!+
#"
+
.
.!#$+
(' #$
52 7
$., $'
(,
+
.
. )+
#$
$
@
+#
(%
& (
#$
#+
.$
)
2 (,
+
(,
C
*
%
/.
#*
+.'
(
C %
C
+
(%
#"
+
.
'
*)#
.'
- $'
3 5*7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
$.
!#(
/).
#$
)
/).
"#$
+
.
*#
+
#"
(2.
+
, +
(,
#$
$. .'
+
(,
(%
#"
+
.
'
*)#
.'
- $'
3 5'7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
(#+
/.
)
/).
"#$
(%
' ,.
$.
&)+
(,
"$#
.*
!
.(+4
( /
)
+%
+#
**.
+
.
.!#$+3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000506
5.7 (%
C./
+.
#$
%!.$)
(@
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.
.!#$+
!$#2
'.'
"#$
("#$ +
#( )
!&$!#
.
#()%
('
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(#+
$.
!#(
/).
"#$
+
.
**&$ *%
#"
(%
("#$ +
#(
2 ) /).
"$#
#$
+
$#&,
(%
$.".$.(*.'
C./
+.
#$
%!.$)
(@3
5"7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
)
/
)
+%
"#$
(%
*)
#$
*)
(*)&'
(,
/&+
(#+
)
+.'
+#
(%
*)
"#$
/$. *
#"
*#(+$ *+
#$
(.,)
,.(*.
)
+.'
+#
*+& )
!$#2.(
' ,.
$.
&)+
#"
(
.$$#$
#$
#
#(
(
+
.
.!#$+
('
))
/.
.
&$.'
/%
+
.
'
"".$.(*.
/.+C..(
+
.
#&(+
!
'
"#$
+
.
!$#!.$+%
('
+
.
"
$
$@.+
2 )&.
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%
#"
+
.
' +.
#"
+
.
.!#$+
"
('
#()%
"
&*
'
"".$.(*.
* &
.'
/%
+
.
.$$#$
#$
#
#(3
5,7
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
(#+
/.
)
/).
"#$
(%
(*
'.(+ )
' ,.
*#(
.?&.(+
)
' ,.
!.*
)
' ,.
('
$.*+
' ,.
#$
)#
+
!$#"
+
&"".$.'
/%
.*
!
.(+5
73 H -*)
-
.!#$+
%
(*)&'.
9:
9)##'
.+.$
( +
#(
.$+
"
* +.
!$#2
'.'
/%
+
$' ! $+%3
;"
&*
*.$+
"
* +.
(*)&'.'
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
@.
(#
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
#$
'.+.$
( +
#(
#$
#"".$
(%
#!
(
#(
+#
C
.+
.$
")##'
(
&$ (*.
$.?&
$.'
C
.+
.$
!$
2 +.
#$
#"".$.'
! $+
#"
,#2.$( .(+
!$#,$
#$
(%
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
#$
'.+.$
( +
#(
#"
+
.
*#
+
#"
(%
&*
(
&$ (*.
E $
-
.
("#$ +
#(
*#)).*+.'
('
'
*)#
.'
(
+
.
.!#$+
(#+
('
* +
2. #"
(%
!.$
#( 4
*$.'
+
C#$+
(.
*$.'
+
+ ('
(,
*$.'
+
*#$.
*$.'
+
* ! *
+%
#$
(%
#+
.$
*
$ *+.$
+
*
)
+.'
(
.*+
#(
5 7
#"
+
.
9 $
$.'
+
.!#$+
(,
*+
5K9L73
.
.!#$+
))
(#+
/.
&
.'
(
(%
C %
#$
"#$
(%
!&$!#
.
#$
(
(%
((.$
+
+
C#&)'
* &
.
+
.
.!#$+
+#
/.
*#(
+$&.'
K*#(
& .$
$.!#$+L
&('.$
+
.
9
#$
(%
) $
+ +.
#$
9.'.$ )
+ +&+.
$&).
) C
#$
$.,&) +
#(
@B
> $
.!#$+
(
K
;L
.!#$+3
!' +.
+#
+
.
' + /
.
&
.'
(
+
.!#$+
$.
'.+.$
(.'
/%
+
.
$.
!#(
/).
,.(*%
('
%
/.
'.
+
(%
+
.
('
C
+
#&+
(#+
*.3
9#$
+
+
$.
#(
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(+
(
(
&!' +.
*
.'&).
('
@.
$.
#( /).
.""#$+
+#
&
.
&!' +.'
("#$ +
#(3
.
*# !).6
+
.
#"
#/+
(
(,
('
' !+
(,
+
.
' +
(+#
&
/).
"#$ +
"#$
!$.! $
(,
+
.!#$+
(.*.
+ +.
# .
'.) %
#(*.
+
.
&!' +.'
("#$ +
#(
#/+
(.'S
+
.$."#$.
+
.
.!#$+
%
/.
*#(
'.$.'
**&$ +.
#()%
#"
+
.
' +.
C
.(
+
.
' + /
.
C
)
+
$.2
.C.'
('
!). .(+.'
/%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.3
&/
.?&.(+
+#
*)#
&$.
#&$*.4
*?&
+
#(
#"
,#2.$( .(+
$.*#$'
*
(,.
%
/.
'.
+#
'
,#2.$( .(+
$.*#$'
('
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
2. (#
#/)
, +
#(
+#
&!' +.
+
.
.!#$+
#$
+#
*# &(
* +.
+#
(%
.*
!
.(+ 5
7
#$
(%
#+
.$
!.$
#(
(%
*
(,.
*+
#**&$$.(*.
*
$*&
+ (*.
#$
,$.. .(+
#**&$$
(,
"+.$
+
.
' +.
#"
+
.
.!#$+
C
*
$.('.$
( **&$ +.
(%+
(,
*#(+
(.'
(
+
.
.!#$+3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
%
+
+
#).
'
*$.+
#(
&!!). .(+
+
.
.!#$+3
.
'.+.$
( +
#(
'.
(
+
.
.!#$+
$.
+
.
.(
+
2.3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
(#+
/.
)
/).
"#$
(%
! *+
#(
+
.
1$#!.$+%
#$
+
.
2 )&.
+
.$.#"
+
+
(%
*
(,.
+#
+
.
,#2.$( .(+
$.*#$'
%
2.3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
&('.$
(#
'&+%
+#
&!' +.
+
.!#$+
C
.(
#$
"
(.C
("#$ +
#(
$.).
.'
#$
/.*# .
2 ) /).3
@@
.*
!
.(+5
7 &
+
!$# !+)%
(#+
"%
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(
C$
+
(,
#"
(%
.$$#$
#$
#
#(
('
,
2.
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
(
#!!#$+&(
+%
+#
*#$$.*+
&*
.$$#$
('
#
#(3
))
(#+
*.
('
*)
))
/.
''$.
.'
+#
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
)
.! $+ .(+
D +.C %
H)2'
P
#(*#$'
3
(%
*)
&
+
/.
,
2.(
!$# !+)%
(
C$
+
(,
C
.(
@(#C).',.
*?&
$.'
/%
(%
)
(+
#"
(%
("#$ +
#(
C
*
*#(+$ $%
+#
+
.
*)#
&$.
.!#$+3
;"
C$
++.(
*)
(#+
*.
(#+
,
2.(
!$# !+)%
+#
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
)
/
)
+%
#"
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
))
+.$
( +.
C
+
$., $'
+#
+
.
++.$
"#$
C
*
!$# !+
*)
(#+
*.
$.?&
$.'
/&+
#()%
+#
+
.
.6+.(+
+
+
+
.
"
)&$.
+#
,
2. !$# !+
C$
++.(
(#+
*.
!$.0&'
*.'
*)#
&$.
#&$*.3
@D 0?> &
.
.
.$
('
#('
+
#(
('
(%
.*
!
.(+4
&
.
#"
+
.
.!#$+
))
/.
,#2.$(.'
/%
('
*#(
+$&.'
(
**#$' (*.
C
+
+
.
) C
#"
+
.
+ +.
#"
)
"#$(
3 @C
.
/
:E
H;;3
!$#2
#(
*#(
+
+&+.
(
,$.. .(+
+#
$/
+$ +.
'
!&+.
#(
(
('
2 '& )
/
3 >
?
> 3
(%
*)
'
!&+.
#$
*#(+$#2.$
%
!&$
& (+
+#
*#(+$ *+
#$
+#$+
) C
#$
#+
.$C
.
$
(,
#&+
#"
#$
$.) +
(,
+#
+
,$.. .(+
+
.
.!#$+
+
& (*.
+
*#(+.(+
+
.
'
*)#
&$.
/$. *
#"
+
.
,$.. .(+
(%
*#(+$#2.$
%
#$
*)
$
(,
#&+
#"
+
.
+$ (
*+
#(
,
2 (,
$
.
+#
+
,$.. .(+
#$
+
.
$.) +
#(
!
#(,
+
.
! $+
.
.$.+#
5J)
J7
))
/.
$.
#)2.'
/%
#(.
$/
+$ +#$
+
$#&,
/
(,
(,
$/
+$ +
#(
'
(
+.$.'
/%
+
.
.$
* (
$/
+$ +
#(
#*
+
#(
5JJ7
&('.$
+
.
#(
& .$
&).
(
."".*+
+
+
.
+
.
+
.
)
"
).'
5J
&).
J73
#!
.
#"
&).
('
"#$
* (
/.
)#* +.'
+
CCC3 '$3#$,
#$
/%
* ))
(,
3
.
$/
+$ +
#(
C
))
+ @.
!) *.
(
+
.
.
*#&(+%
(
C
*
+
.
!$#!.$+%
)#* +.'3
.
$/
+$ +#$N
'.*
#(
))
/.
"
( )
/
('
(,
('
(#( !!. ) /).3
&', .(+
&!#(
+
.
C $'
%
/.
.(+.$.'
('
.("#$*.'
(
*#&$+
2 (,
0&$
'
*+
#(3
*) &
.
'.
!&$
& (+
+#
+$ (
*+
#(
(2#)2
(,
(+.$
+ +.
*# .$*.
('
))
/.
,#2.$(.'
/%
+
.
9.'.$ )
$/
+$ +
#(
*+3
H%
$.*.
2 (,
+
.!#$+
('
.(+.$
(,
(+#
+
,$.. .(+
+
.
! $+
.
*@(#C).',.
+
+
+
.%
$.
,
2 (,
&!
+
.
$
,
+
+#
0&$%
+$
)
('
+
.
$
,
+
+#
! $+
*
! +.
(
(%
*)
*+
#(
!$
2 +.
++#$(.%
,.(.$ )
*+
#(
#$
#+
.$
$.!$.
.(+ +
2. #$
*#(
#)
' +.'
*+
#(
(*)&'
(,
(%
*)
$/
+$ +
#(
#$
*#(
#)
' +.'
$/
+$ +
#(
!$#*..'
(,3
.
+
.$
! $+%
))
&.
+
.
#+
.$
! $+%
#+
.$
+
(
!$#2
'.'
.$.
(
#$
"#$
.("#$*. .(+
#"
+
*) &
.
#$
#"
+
.
$/
+$ +#$N
C $'B
(%
&*
&
+
%
/.
/$#&,
+
#()%
(
9.'.$ )
+$
*+
#&$+
"#$
+
.
+$
*+
#$
"
(%
&*
*#&$+
) *@
0&$
'
*+
#(
(
+ +.
*#&$+
+
+
0&$
'
*+
#(3
.
$/
+$ +#$
('
(#+
(%
".'.$ )
+ +.
#$
)#* )
*#&$+
))
2. .6*)&
2. &+
#$
+%
+#
$.
#)2.
(%
'
!&+.
$.) +
(,
+#
+
.
(+.$!$.+ +
#(
!!)
* /
)
+%
&(*#(
*
#( /
)
+%
$/
+$ /
)
+%
.("#$*. /
)
+%
#$
"#$ +
#(
#"
+
,$.. .(+
+#
$/
+$ +.
(*)&'
(,
*)
+
+
))
#$
! $+
#"
+
.
.$
('
#('
+
#(
(*)&'
(,
+
,$.. .(+
+#
$/
+$ +.
2#
'
#$
2#
' /).3
#C.2.$
+
.
!$.*.'
(,
.(+.(*.
))
(#+
!!)%
+#
+
.
*) &
.
.(+
+).'
K)
*+
#(
>
2.$3L
(#+.'
/#2.
! $+%
.).*+
+#
/$
(,
(
('
2 '& )
*+
#(
(
))
*)
*#&$+
(
+. '
#"
$/
+$ +
#(
#
)#(,
+
.
'
!&+.
" ))
C
+
(
+
.
0&$
'
*+
#( )
$.?&
$. .(+
#"
))
*)
*#&$+3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000507
8
;
>;<3
(%
)
&
+
/.
/$#&,
+
(
+
.
! $+
.
N
('
2 '& )
* ! *
+%
('
(#+
!)
(+
""
#$
*)
. /.$
(
(%
!&$!#$+.'
*)
*#)).*+
2.
$.!$.
.(+ +
2.
&)+
!).
!)
(+
""
#$
) $
!$#*..'
(,
5J)
*+
#(J73
.
! $+
.
.6!$.
)%
C
2. (%
/
)
+%
+#
(+
(
(%
)
*+
#(
(
"#$& 3
.
$/
+$ +#$
))
(#+
2. &+
#$
+%
+#
*# /
(.
#$
,,$., +.
) $
*)
#$
*#('&*+
(%
)
*+
#(
(#$
@.
(
C $'
+#
!.$
#(
#$
.(+
+%
(#+
! $+%
+#
+
.
$/
+$ +
#(3
(%
*)
+
+
))
#$
! $+
#"
+
)
*+
#(
>
2.$
&(.("#$*. /).
&(*#(
*
#( /).
2#
'
#$
2#
' /).
%
/.
'.+.$
(.'
#()%
/%
*#&$+
#"
*# !.+.(+
0&$
'
*+
#(
('
(#+
/%
(
$/
+$ +#$3
@J ?
;(
+
.
.2.(+
(%
!$#2
#(
#"
+
*)#
&$.
.!#$+
.)'
(2 )
'
#$
&(.("#$*. /).
&('.$
!!)
* /).
) C
+
*)#
&$.
.!#$+
))
/.
'.. .'
(#+
+#
(*)&'.
+
+
!$#2
#(
('
))
#+
.$
!$#2
#(
))
$.
(
(
"&))
"#$*.
('
."".*+3
@A
>
.
.
.$
('
#('
+
#(
*#(
+
+&+.
+
.
(,).
('
.(+
$.
(+.,$ +.'
,$.. .(+
/.+C..(
*)#
&$.
#&$*.
('
+
.
.*
!
.(+ 5
7
('
&!.$
.'.
('
$.!) *.
))
!$
#$
+ +. .(+
$.!$.
.(+ +
#(
'
*&
#(
(.,#+
+
#(
('
,$.. .(+
3
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000508
42&*0*)*
- **$
- $ & +*
$*
1$ $*
.
.)).$
('
#$
.$
,.(+5
7 #$
+
$'! $+%
*#(
&)+ (+
'
*)#
.
+
.
"#))#C
(,
("#$ +
#(
C
+
+
.
@(#C).',.
+
+
.2.(
+
#&,
+
(#+
C $$ (+%
!$#
!.*+
2. /&%.$
%
$.)%
#(
+
("#$ +
#(
(
'.*
'
(,
C
.+
.$
('
#(
C
+
+.$
+#
!&$*
.
+
.
&/0.*+
!$#!.$+%3
.)).$
.$./%
&+
#$
-.
(%
,.(+5
7 $.!$.
.(+
(,
(%
!$
(*
! )5
7 (
+
*+
#(
+#
!$#2
'.
*#!%
#"
+
+ +. .(+
+#
(%
!.$
#(
#$
.(+
+%
(
*#((.*+
#(
C
+
(%
*+& )
#$
(+
*
! +.'
).
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%3
88
;
D57
<
1<;
11;<
HE57
;9:;
;8
>;;
;8
1
HB
+
& !
,
$ & +*
;9
11E
;
8
;
98
9;
;:;D8D;
98
=57
1
:1
9:
;E
E
98
3
$
$-&+**
$
%$)$
(
;9
11E
;
99
HE
;1
;98
11E4
1F;:;E
;9
8;D
9;8;;3
$0!
-
) $ & +*
9
F;
9
1;:
9:8
>;;
:;8
9
H
11E
)$$0 *
$ $ & +*
9
F;
9
:;;D
1;
>;;
:;8
9
H
11E3
*1$)*
& $-)
$
;9:;
D;D
;
>;
<;:8
3
-* -**
$*
$* - +&*)*
& *
(
% 3$&&
9
9
;
;
9
118:8
11E
F
H;883
0 !
,
+ &$5+$
)$ $ $*&$*
$*
;
D;D
D
=
8;I;
:;;
1;18;3
%$ )&
$*
88
;
9
E
:8
;;3
-& $ +
*
$*
;
;;D
;9:;
H
9
;
8;9
<;8H;8;E
;
8;
1
;
8;9
;
98
;
I;:3
2 *6 *1$0 &+)3$0 -$%
+*
$*
;
D;D
18:
9
:18;
18:H;D
9;F3
)*0
8 &
2
$*
;9:;
D;D
1
>
I;
D;
>;
1:
9
;
8;D
9:
<;;
9
F88E
H
993
)*
!
)!*
)$* -*
(&
)$
* *
(
$*
;9:;
H
::1:;
9E8
:;
11E
;9;;
I;:3
2$&&$
)
$*
;
D;D
>;88;:
;
3
)$&$
(
* &
$
$*
;
D;D
9:8E
98
:;8;E
;3
)+ &$* ' *3$ -&2
1$ (
9
1;8
9
:8;
H;
98>
;D
;:
;
>
>;89;
<
3
!
3$
* $
$1$
(
*
'*
0** *$*
1$ (
9
F;
9
D
1;
H;
;;<;E
;
3
$& 0
2*&& K )*
!
*
1$ (
9
F;
9
;8
D
>88
G
:
;
3
+
&&( +$0
3*
1$ (
9
9
;9:;
D;D
88E
;D
H3
1$ (
9
9
;9:;
D;D
=3
=
:E
8;:;
E
H;8;E
<81
8
11E
H;
;
;<
;
9
;3
:1
>;
;8
H
;:
>
8
=
F;3
E
9;;;<
;;
9
>
11E
>;88
H
99
HE
8
;3
8857
HE57
:E
>;
H;
19;8
<;
D;D
=
=
:E
99
11E3
8857
HE57
>8D
;1
9
;9:;
9
H<
;8
;
1
9
H<
;H
11E
,( +&$.
#"
.)).$
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
,( +&$.
#"
.)).$
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
.)).$N
,.(+5
7 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
.)).$N
,.(+5
7 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
,( +&$.
#"
H&%.$
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
,( +&$.
#"
H&%.$
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO +.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
'
*O
'
*O
'
'*O
'
'*O
'
'*O)
'
'*O)
'
'*O/
'
'*O/
'
*O)
'
*O)
'
*O/
'
*O/
*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
++!
BCCC3
*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000509
DP No. 21Ͳ70408
2498/ 2550 Conejo Center Drive
Photo taken on March 23, 2022
Draft
CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for February 2022
City of Thousand Oaks
Draft
CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for February 2022
City of Thousand Oaks
770 Paseo Camarillo
Suite 310
Camarillo, CA 93010
805 914-1500
esassoc.com
Bend
Camarillo
Delray Beach
Destin
Irvine
Los Angeles
Oakland
Orlando
Pasadena
Petaluma
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Santa Monica
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa
D201700220.01
OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.
Conejo Summit Project i ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Conejo Summit Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration......................................................................... 1
1.0 Project Description .................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Project Location and Surrounding Uses ...................................................... 3
1.3 Background and Existing Conditions ........................................................... 6
1.4 Project Description ....................................................................................... 6
1.5 Cumulative Projects ................................................................................... 13
1.6 Construction Schedule and Activities ........................................................ 14
1.7 Project Approvals ....................................................................................... 14
2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .......................................................... 15
3.0 Environmental Checklist ....................................................................................... 16 Aesthetics .............................................................................................................. 16 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ..................................................................... 22 Air Quality .............................................................................................................. 24 Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 38 Cultural Resources................................................................................................ 64 Energy ................................................................................................................... 68 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................. 74 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................. 79 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 90 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................ 95 Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................... 98 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................. 100 Noise ................................................................................................................... 102 Population and Housing ...................................................................................... 112 Public Services .................................................................................................... 113 Recreation ........................................................................................................... 115 Transportation ..................................................................................................... 116 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................... 120 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................. 122 Wildfire ................................................................................................................ 125 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................... 127 Table of Contents
Page
Conejo Summit Project ii ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Appendices
A. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Emissions Calculations B. CNDDB Database Results
C. Rare Plant Survey Memorandum
D. Energy Calculations
E. Geotechnical Site Evaluation
F. Stormwater Calculations
G. Noise Calculations
H. Traffic Studies
I. Water Supply Assessment
List of Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location ...................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2 Project Site and Surrounding Area ............................................................................ 5 Figure 3 Site Plan .....................................................................................................................7 Figure 4 Photo Location Map ................................................................................................. 18 Figure 5 View from Location A ............................................................................................... 19 Figure 6 View from Location B ............................................................................................... 20 Figure 7 View from Location C ............................................................................................... 21 Figure 8 Plant Communities ................................................................................................... 41 List of Tables
Table 1 Summary of Building Characteristics by Lot .............................................................. 8 Table 2 Cumulative Projects ................................................................................................. 13 Table 3 Maximum Daily Unmitigated Regional Construction Emissions .............................. 29 Table 4 Maximum Daily Mitigated Regional Construction Emissions .................................. 29 Table 5 Maximum Daily Regional Operational Emissions .................................................... 30 Table 6 Plant Communities within Project Site ..................................................................... 40 Table 7 Potentially Occurring Special-Status Wildlife Species within the Project Site ......... 44 Table 8 Special-Status Plant Species Observed and Potentially Occurring within the Project Site ............................................................................................................... 47 Table 9 Summary of Annual Net New Energy Use During Project Operation ..................... 70 Table 10 GHG Emissions ........................................................................................................ 82 Table 11 Project Compliance with 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Actions and Strategies ................................................................................................................. 83 Table 12 General Plan Consistency Analysis ......................................................................... 98 Table 13 Construction Equipment and Estimated Noise Levels........................................... 105 Table 14 Unmitigated Maximum Construction Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptors .......... 106 Table 15 Predicted Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................... 107 Table 16 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................................ 109 Conejo Summit Project iii ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Conejo Summit Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AQMP air quality management plan
ASHRAE America Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers ATCM Airborne Toxic Control Measures
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BC3 Business Council on Climate Change
BMP best management practices
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalOSHA California Division of Occupational Safety and Health CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association CARB California Air Resource Board
CBC California Building Code
CCAR California Climate Action Registry
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFA California Department of Food and Agriculture
CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEAP Climate and Environmental Action Plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CGEU California Gas and Electric Utilities
CGS California Geological Survey
CH4 methane
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CNPS Branch, California Native Plant Society
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
COSCA Conejo Open Space Conservation Area
CPA Clean Power Alliance
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CWA Clean Water Act
CWPA Critical Wildlife Passage Areas
dB decibels
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Conejo Summit Project iv ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
dBA A-weighted decibels
DOC California Department of Conservation
DPR Department of Parks and Recreations
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERP Emergency Response Plan
ESA Environmental Science Associates
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Act
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
GWP global warming potential
HCWC Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridor
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
LACM Los Angeles County Natural History Museum
LEV Low-Emission Vehicle
LID Low Impact Development
LOS level of service
LSAA Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
LUST leaking underground storage tank
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD most likely descendant
MSC Municipal Service Center
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NF3 nitrogen trifluoride
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOX nitrogen oxide
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPPA California Native Plant Protection Act
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OHP California Office of Historic Preservation’s
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PFC perfluorocarbon
PHEV plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
PM10 respirable and fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter PPV peak particle velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
ROG reactive organic gas
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Conejo Summit Project v ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
RPS California Renewable Portfolio Standard
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SCAG Southern California Association of Government
SCCAB South Central Coast Air Basin
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SCE Southern California Edison
SCMLP South Coast Missing Linkages Project
SF square feet
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SLCP Short-Lived Climate Pollutant
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminant
TCR Tribal Cultural Resource
TIMF Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee
TNM Traffic Noise Model
TNW Traditionally Navigable Water
TOMC Thousand Oaks Municipal Code
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDSG U.S. Department of State Geographer
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
VCAPCD Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
VCFD Ventura County Fire Department
VCOC Ventura County Ordinance Code
VCOG Ventura Council Association of Governments
VCTM Ventura County Transportation Model
VdB velocity in decibels
VMT vehicles miles traveled
VTTM Vesting Tentative Tract Maps
WDR Waste Discharge Requirement
WSA Water Supply Assessment
ZEV Zero-Emission Vehicle
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Conejo Summit Project vi ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 This page intentionally left blank
Conejo Summit Project 1 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1. Project Title: Conejo Summit Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Thousand Oaks, Community Development Department, 2100 Thousand
Oaks Boulevard Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Iain Holt, AICP Senior Planner 805 449-2314
4. Project Location: Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Blvd.
Newbury Park
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Thousand Oaks Master LLC, 11200 Corbin Ave. Suite 201, Porter Ranch, CA 91326
6. General Plan Designation(s): Employment Park
7. Zoning: M-1 Zone (Industrial Park Zone)
8. Description of Project:
The proposed project includes construction of a 15-building business park on 16 privately owned parcels. The 16 parcels include previously created lots that are approximately 49.83 acres (2,170,594.80 square feet (SF)); the proposed buildings would be built on approximately 17 acres (754,222 SF). The lots are in three separate clusters: on the western side of Conejo Center Drive just northwest of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Conejo Spectrum Street; along the eastern side of Conejo Center Drive from Conejo Spectrum Street up to Rancho Conejo Boulevard; and north of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard, extending west to a parcel at the end of Rancho Conejo Boulevard. The lots would be located within and re-configured as shown on the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6021 (VTTM 6021) and Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6022 (VTTM 6022) that would be approved as part of the project development.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting.
Nearby land uses as identified in the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan include “Industrial,” “Institutional, and “Existing Parks, and Open Space” (City of Thousand Oaks, 2015). Adjacent to the project site to the north and west is land that is owned and managed by the Conejo Open Space Conservation Area (COSCA). Industrial development is located northeast of the project site as well as to the south and west of the parcels that would be developed, including the City’s Municipal Service Center (MSC).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 2 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required
A preliminary list of discretionary entitlements, reviews, and approvals required or requested for the project may include, but would not necessarily be limited to, the following:
x Vesting Tentative Tract Maps (2)
x Development Permit (including modifications to maximum building height and setback from centerline of street)
x Oak Tree Permit (encroachment)
x Landscape Plan Review
x Construction Permits, including building, grading, foundation, and associated permits x Encroachment and Haul Route Permit, as may be required by the City of Thousand Oaks
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
The City has received no requests for Tribal Consultation under AB52.
Conejo Summit Project 3 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
CONEJO SUMMIT PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1.0 Project Description
1.1 Introduction
Thousand Oaks Master LLC (Applicant) is proposing to implement the Conejo Summit Project (proposed project), a multiple-phase business park development that would include 15 industrial buildings within the City of Thousand Oaks (City). The City of Thousand Oaks, as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and that the preparation of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) is required. This section describes the proposed project’s location and a description of the project components, including a brief description of the proposed construction schedule.
1.2 Project Location and Surrounding Uses
The proposed project site, which consists of approximately 49.83 acres, is located in Ventura County, within the City of Thousand Oaks (Figure 1, Regional Location). More specifically, the project site is located near the western boundary of the City within the northwestern portion of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area, approximately 1 mile north of the 101 Freeway (Figure 2, Project Site and Surrounding Area).
The project site is located entirely within the City’s Specific Plan No. 7 planning area, which is discussed in more detail below, in the northwestern portion of the existing Rancho Conejo Industrial Area. Land that is owned and managed by the COSCA is located to the north and west of the project site. Industrial development is located northeast of the project site as well as to the south and west of the parcels that would be developed, including the City’s MSC.
Pacific Ocean
£¤101
UV118
UV150
UV232
UV126
UV150
UV126
UV150
UV1 UV23
UV150 UV150
UV118
UV1
UV23
UV150
Piru
Somis
Oxnard
Malibu
Saticoy
Moorpark
Fillmore
Val Verde
Del Valle
Camarillo
Calabasas
Simi Valley
Port Hueneme
Newbury Park
Thousand Oaks
Ventura Ventura
Santa Monica Mountains Los Angeles Los Angeles
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\17xxxx\D170220_01_Thousand Oaks\03_MXDs_Projects\PD\Fig1_RegionalLocation.mxd, janderson 1/21/2021 SOURCE: ESRI Conejo Summit Project
Figure 1
Regional Location
N
04 Miles
!(^
Project Location
Area of
Detail
Rancho Conejo Blvd
CONEJO OPEN SPACE
CONSERVATION AREA
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\17xxxx\D170220_01_Thousand Oaks\03_MXDs_Projects\PD\Fig2_Project_Vicinity.mxd, janderson 1/21/2021 Source: Mapbox, 2020.
N
0 2,000
Feet
Project Area
City of Thousand Oaks
Natural Open Space Areas
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 2
Project Site and Surrounding Area
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 6 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
1.3 Background and Existing Conditions
Specific Plan No. 7, which was originally adopted in 1983, covers approximately 1,862 acres of land.1 Specific Plan No. 7 has been amended multiple time, most recently in January 2015 and again in October 2015. Specific Plan 7 Amendment 15 was adopted January 12, 2015, predesignated property under planning unit Q to Employment Park and evaluated the environmental impacts of the contemplated uses under that designation.2 Specific Plan 7 Amendment 16 was adopted October 20, 2015, to change planning unit 5 from High Density to Employment Park. The City evaluated the environmental impacts of the contemplated uses under that designation3.
Currently, the southern portions of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area have been developed resulting in a biotech corridor with companies such as Amgen and Teledyne Technologies. These companies make up the majority of the industrial businesses in the City. As of 2017, Rancho Conejo Industrial Area contains over 120 industrial buildings ranging from 5,000 SF to 127,000 SF, with a vacancy rate of less than two percent.4
In 2000 the project area was graded, and infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks and utilities were installed to prepare for future buildings. The proposed project would be located within Planning Units B, 5, and Q identified in Specific Plan No. 7. The development standards provided in the Specific Plan are applicable to the project. Specific Plan No.7 designates the parcels as Employment Park and is zoned Industrial Park (M-1).
1.4 Project Description
The proposed project site, which encompasses approximately 49.83 acres (approximately 2,170,595 SF) of land, would be developed with 15 industrial buildings as shown in Figure 3, Site Plan. The lots are in three separate clusters: on the western side of Conejo Center Drive just northwest of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Conejo Spectrum Street; along the eastern side of Conejo Center Drive from Conejo Spectrum Street up to Rancho Conejo Boulevard; and north of the intersection of Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard, extending west to a parcel at the end of Rancho Conejo Boulevard. The application includes two proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Maps (VTTM) that will reconfigure the existing lots. No new lots are proposed. VTTM 6021, which includes lots in Planning Areas B and 5, and VTTM 6022, which includes lots in Planning Area Q. VTTM No. 6021 includes 36.85 acres that would be subdivided into 12 condominium lots for Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 2, 3, 4A, and 4B.
VTTM 6022 includes 15.49 acres that would be subdivided into 4 condominium lots for Buildings 5A, 5B, 6A, and 6B.
1 City of Thousand Oaks Resolution No. 83-326; Final EIR for MGM Ranch Specific Plan 7 Annexation 96, Volumes I and II) (Amendment No. 16).
2 City of Thousand Oaks Resolution No. 2015-006; Negative Declaration 2014-70252 (Amendment No. 15) 3 City of Thousand Oaks Resolution No. 2015-067; Negative Declaration 2015-70251 (Amendment No. 16) 4 Thousand Oaks Economic Development Strategic Plan. (November 2017). Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://www.toaks.org/home/showdocument?id=16994
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 3
Site Plan
SOURCE: HPA Architeture, 2019
D170220.01 - City of Thousand Oaks_Conejo Summit\05 Graphics-GIS-Modeling\PD 0 450 N Feet
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 8 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Table 1 provides the characteristics of each building on the 15 lots to be developed. The buildings would range in size from 32,015 SF to 93,308 SF of floor area. Building heights would range from 37 to 41 feet. The Rancho Conejo Specific Plan No. 7 applies the M-1 (Light Industrial) zoning standards, which has a maximum average height of 35 feet. As part of the Development Plan permit, the Municipal Code Section 9-4.1605 allows waivers requests to be considered by the decision-making body. The project includes waivers for the increase height as identified in Table 1 and reduction of the 100-foot setback from centerline of adjacent streets (Buildings 1A, 1G from Conejo Summit; Building 5B from Rancho Conejo Boulevard, 4A, 4B from future Academy Road extension). Typically, each building would have office space at the front of the building with warehouse/light manufacturing space in the rear. Primary access to the proposed buildings would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard and Conejo Center Drive.
In addition, the proposed project would include site improvements for each lot as shown on Figure 3. Vehicular access, circulation and parking would be provided. The required fire lanes would be provided and are shown on Figure 3. Sufficient parking would be provided in surface lots, generally located around each building, for the ancillary office and industrial uses. In addition, utility hookups would be installed from existing lines within the streets to the proposed buildings. Loading docks and refuse areas would be developed. Landscaping would be installed on each lot.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS BY LOT
7.5 Lot Size Building SF* Use (SF)
Building
Height
Lot
Coverage Parking
VTTM No. 6021 Office Mfg.
1A
(1)
2.38 ac
(102,770 SF)
33,552 SF 5,000 SF
(15%)
28,552 SF
(85%)
38 feet 32.6% 78 stalls
1B
(2)
2.27 ac
(98,694 SF)
39,896 SF 6,500 SF
(16%)
33,396 SF
(84%)
38 feet 40.4% 93 stalls
1C
(3)
2.22 ac
(98,906 SF)
39,900 SF 7,500 SF
(19%)
32,400 SF
(81%)
39 feet 41.2% 95 stalls
1D
(4)
3.98 ac
(173,542 SF)
62,568 SF 4,500 SF
(7%)
58,068 SF
(93%)
41 feet 36.1% 135 stalls
1E
(5)
3.86 ac
(168,275 SF)
74,101 SF 5,000 SF
(7%)
69,101 SF
(93%)
41 feet 44.0% 144 stalls
1F
(6)
2.81 ac
(122,285 SF)
52,924 SF 5,000 SF
(9%)
47,924 SF
(91%)
40 feet 43.3% 106 stalls
1G
(7)
4.07 ac
(177,212 SF)
50,460 SF 5,000 SF
(10%)
45,460 SF
(90%)
41 feet 28.5% 96 stalls
(8) N/A** N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2 (9)
2.67 ac
(116,490 SF)
38,748 SF 5,000 SF
(13%)
33,748 SF
(87%)
37 feet 33.3% 88 stalls
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 9 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
7.5 Lot Size Building SF* Use (SF)
Building
Height
Lot
Coverage Parking
3 (10)
5.17 ac
(225,088 SF)
49,368 SF 14,000 SF
(29%)
35,368 SF
(71%)
38 feet 21.9% 128 stalls
4A
(11)
2.30 ac
(100,047 SF)
41,967 SF 1,800 SF
(4%)
40,167 SF
(96%)
39 feet 41.9% 88 stalls
4B
(12)
2.42 ac
(105,362 SF)
32,570 SF 1,800 SF
(6%)
30,770 SF
(94%)
39 feet 30.9% 69 stalls
VTTM No. 6021
Sub-Total:
34.15 ac
(1,488,671 SF)
516,054 SF 61,100 SF 454,954 SF N/A N/A 1,120 stalls
VTTM No. 6022 Office Mfg.
5A
(1)
5.50 ac
(239,665 SF)
90,080 SF 3,500 SF
(4%)
86,580 SF
(96%)
39 feet 37.6% 189 stalls
5B
(2)
1.29 ac
(56,315 SF)
22,765 SF 3,500 SF
(15%)
19,265 SF
(85%)
38 feet 40.4% 53 stalls
6A
(3)
2.09 ac
(90,871 SF)
32,015 SF 6,500 SF
(20%)
25,515 SF
(80%)
38 feet 35.2% 78 stalls
6B
(4)
6.61 ac
(268,104 SF)
93,308 SF 8,500 SF
(9%)
84,808 SF
(91%)
40 feet 32.4% 223 stalls
VTTM No. 6022
Sub-Total:
15.49 ac
(654,955 SF)
238,168 SF 22,000 SF 216,168 SF N/A N/A 543 stalls
VTTM No. 6021
and 6022 Total:
49.64 ac
(2,143,626 SF)
754,222 SF 83,100 SF 671,122 SF N/A N/A 1663 Stalls
*VTTM = Vesting Tentative Tract Map, ac = acre(s), SF=square feet. **VTTM No. 6021 Lot 8 is within the project area; however, the lot would not be developed as part of the project.
SOURCES: Thousand Oaks Master, LLC. (April 2019). Conejo Summit Project Site Plan.; ESA 2020.
The proposed project would include the dedication of and development of Academy Drive, which would extend to the north from Conejo Center Drive, and would provide access to Lots 4A and 4B (see Figure 3). The right-of-way for Academy Drive would be 50 feet in width and approximately 500 feet in length terminating at the western end of the Specific Plan area. In addition, the proposed project would provide an 8-foot-wide equestrian easement along the east side of the Academy Drive. The proposed project would also provide an additional 3-foot-wide easement along the north side of Conejo Center Drive. These easements would allow for a connection to the proposed equestrian trail along Academy Drive west of the project, which would be built by others, and the COSCA Western Plateau Trail. In addition, a 20-foot-wide fire access easement is proposed within the 30-foot-wide drive aisle of Lot 6B with access via Rancho Conejo Boulevard. The fire access easement would be within the drive aisle along the western side of Lot 6B and would connect in the northeastern portion of the lot to a proposed vehicular access to the Hill Canyon Fire Road. A 10-foot-wide pedestrian trail access easement is proposed to connect to the Hill Canyon Fire Trail. The pedestrian trail access would be within the surface parking lot on the eastern portion of Lot 6B and would connect to the Hill Canyon Fire Road.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 10 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
1.4.1 Building Site Plans
This section provides a summary of the 15 proposed industrial buildings.
Building 1A
Building 1A would be constructed on a 2.36 acres (102,770 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 1). The building would contain a total of 33,552 SF, with approximately 5,000 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 28,552 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 38-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 32.6% of the lot and approximately
25.8% (26,537 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard and Conejo Center Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 78 parking stalls.
Building 1B
Building 1B would be constructed on a 2.27 acres (98,694 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 2). The building would contain a total of 39,896 SF, with approximately 6,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 33,396 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 38-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 40.4% of the lot and approximately
10.7% (10,553 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard and Conejo Center Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 93 parking stalls.
Building 1C
Building 1C would be constructed on a 2.22 acres (96,906 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 3). The building would contain a total of 39,900 SF, with approximately 7,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 32,400 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 39-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 41.2% of the lot and approximately 10% (9,684 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard and Conejo Center Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 95 parking stalls.
Building 1D
Building 1D would be constructed on a 3.98 acres (173,542 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 4). The building would contain a total of 62,568 SF, with approximately 4,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 58,068 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 41-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 36.1% of the lot and approximately
19.5% (33,838 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard and Conejo Center Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 135 parking stalls.
Building 1E
Building 1E would be constructed on a 3.86 acres (168,275 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 5). The building would contain a total of 74,101 SF, with approximately 5,000 SF of office (ground floor Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 11 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 and mezzanine) and 69,101 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 41-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 44% of the lot and approximately 10% (16,900 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 144 parking stalls.
Building 1F
Building 1A would be constructed on a 2.81 acres (122,285 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 6). The building would contain a total of 52,924 SF, with approximately 5,000 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 47,924 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 40-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 43.3% of the lot and approximately 10% (12,200 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 106 parking stalls.
Building 1G
Building 1G would be constructed on a 4.07 acres (177,212 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 7). The building would contain a total of 50,460 SF, with approximately 5,000 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 45,460 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 41-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 28.5% of the lot and approximately
12.5% (22,170 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 96 parking stalls.
Vacant Lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 8)
VTTM No. 6021 Lot 8 is located between Lot 7, where Building 1G is proposed to be constructed, and Lot 10, where Building 2 is proposed to be constructed. No development will occur on Lot 8, as it is a conservation easement, and it will remain in its current natural state.
Building 2
Building 2 would be constructed on a 2.67 acres (116,490 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 9). The building would contain a total of 38,748 SF, with approximately 5,000 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 33,748 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 37-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 33.3% of the lot and approximately 23% (26,749 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 88 parking stalls.
Building 3
Building 3 would be constructed on a 5.17 acres (225,088 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 10). The building would contain a total of 49,368 SF, with approximately 14,000 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 35,368 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 38-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 21.9% of the lot and Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 12 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 approximately 34.2% (76,916 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and potentially from Academy Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 128 parking stalls.
Building 4A
Building 4A would be constructed on a 2.3 acres (100,047 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 11). The building would contain a total of 41,967 SF, with approximately 1,800 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 40,167 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 39-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 41.9% of the lot and approximately
14.2% (14,245 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and Academy Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 88 parking stalls.
Building 4B
Building 4B would be constructed on a 2.42 acres (105,3620 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6021 Lot 12).
The building would contain a total of 32,570 SF, with approximately 1,800 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 30,770 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 39-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 30.9% of the lot and approximately 25.5% (26,906 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Conejo Center Drive and Academy Drive. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 69 parking stalls.
Building 5A
Building 5A would be constructed on a 5.5 acres (239,665 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6022 Lot 1). The building would contain a total of 90,080 SF, with approximately 3,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 86,580 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 39-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 37.6% of the lot and approximately
13.2% (31,745 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 189 parking stalls.
Building 5B
Building 5B would be constructed on a 1.29 acres (56,315 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6022 Lot 2). The building would contain a total of 22,765 SF, with approximately 3,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 19,265 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 38-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 40.4% of the lot and approximately 17% (9,566 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 53 parking stalls.
Building 6A
Building 6A would be constructed on a 2.09 acres (90,871 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6022 Lot 3). The building would contain a total of 32,015 SF, with approximately 6,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 25,515 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 13 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 38-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 35.2% of the lot and approximately
18.6% (16,933 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 78 parking stalls.
Building 6B
Building 6B would be constructed on a 6.61 acres (288,104 SF) lot (VTTM No. 6022 Lot 4). The building would contain a total of 93,308 SF, with approximately 8,500 SF of office (ground floor and mezzanine) and 84,808 SF of manufacturing floor area. The building would be approximately 40-feet in height. The building would cover approximately 32.4% of the lot and approximately
19.7% (56,889 SF) of the lot would be landscaped. Vehicular access to the lot would be from Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Surface parking would be provided, with a total of 223 parking stalls.
1.5 Cumulative Projects
CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(a) requires analysis of a project’s cumulative impacts when a project’s incremental effects are “cumulatively considerable. Impacts that are “cumulatively considerable” are those impacts where the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of current projects, and the effects of probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3)).
The discussion of cumulative impacts is to “be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute.” CEQA Section 15130(b)(1) further states that complying with one of the following elements is necessary for an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts, either:
x A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or x A summary of projects contained in an adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, which describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect.
For the purposes of this MND, the City has followed the first approach, evaluating the project’s potential environmental impact with the potential environmental impacts associated with like projects in the immediate vicinity. Table 2 includes a description of the cumulative projects considered.
TABLE 2
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
Project Location Project Type Project Description
1300 Rancho Conejo
Boulevard
Commercial The demolition 5,600 square feet of existing industrial building and the construction of a 7,700 square foot addition, including an interior and exterior remodel, hardscape, drainage, parking lot improvements, and removal and replacement of existing landscaping to accommodate proposed building modifications, site improvements, and onsite bioretention basins.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 14 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Project Location Project Type Project Description
1515 Rancho Conejo
Boulevard
Industrial Construction of two new 181,958 square foot, one-story industrial buildings, 35 feet in height, including grading, hardscape, landscape, and encroachment into the protected zone of various oaks trees and encroachment and removal of various sycamore trees
West of the intersection
of Corporate Center
Drive and Rancho
Conejo Boulevard
Commercial Request for Residential Capacity Allocation for a proposed 26 residential apartment unit project. The project is associated with a General Plan Amendment to change the existing Land Use designation from Industrial to High Density Residential.
2150 W. Hillcrest Residential Request for Residential Capacity Allocation for a proposed 332 residential apartment unit project with density bonus. The project is associated with a General Plan Amendment to change the existing Land Use designation from Commercial to High Density.
701 N Wendy Drive Commercial A new 9,990 square foot building with a fenced outdoor play area to be utilized as a daycare; a new 1,800 square foot drive-through building pad; two outdoor dining areas; relocation of an existing trash enclosure; and parking modifications.
SOURCE: City of Thousand Oaks, 2021
1.6 Construction Schedule and Activities
The buildings are anticipated to be of conventional tilt-up panel construction with concrete interior slabs on grade. Grading would consist of minor cuts and fills to provide level building pads and parking and circulation areas, and to remove the upper weathered desiccated soils.
Additional minor grading would be needed to level the previously graded pads. The proposed project would require approximately 95,440 cubic yards of cut and fill, which would be balanced on the site. As such, no import or export of materials is anticipated to occur.
The proposed project would consist of a maximum of seven phases, with an anticipated construction period of 12 to 15 months for each phase.
1.7 Project Approvals
A preliminary list of discretionary entitlements, reviews, and approvals required or requested for the project may include, but would not necessarily be limited to, the following:
x Vesting Tentative Tract Maps (2)
x Development Permit (including modifications to maximum building height and setback from centerline of street)
x Oak Tree Permit (encroachment)
x Landscape Plan Review
x Construction Permits, including building, grading, foundation, and associated permits x Encroachment and Haul Route Permit, as may be required by the City of Thousand Oaks
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 15 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
܆ Aesthetics ܆ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ܈ Air Quality ܈ Biological Resources ܈ Cultural Resources ܆ Energy
܈ Geology/Soils ܆ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ܈ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ܆ Hydrology/Water Quality ܆ Land Use/Planning ܆ Mineral Resources ܆ Noise ܆ Population/Housing ܆ Public Services
܆ Recreation ܈ Transportation ܆ Tribal Cultural Resources ܆ Utilities/Service Systems ܈ Wildfire ܈ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial study:
܆ 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 MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been 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 potentially 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
Signature Date
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 16 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022
3.0 Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS — Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099, 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) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime
views in the area?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project includes the development of 15 industrial buildings within an adopted Specific Plan area. The project site consists of approximately 50 acres of the previously approved 1,862 acres Specific Plan No.7.
Currently the proposed project site includes graded lots for the future industrial buildings, sidewalks, and streets. COSCA open space land is located to the north and west of the project site and industrial development is located northeast, south, and west of the project site. To the north and west of the proposed buildings 5A, 5B and 6A within COSCA, there are several trails including the Hill Canyon Trail that have potential views of the project site. The trails within COSCA would be considered a scenic vista and therefore views could be impacted as a result of the development of the proposed project. As a result, visual simulations were prepared to illustrate the visual effect the proposed project would have to scenic quality in the area. Photos were taken from the surrounding public trails within COSCA that potentially had views of the proposed project (Figure 4, Photo Location Map). From each of these photo locations a visual simulation of the proposed buildings was prepared (Figures 5 through 7). The proposed buildings average approximately 39 feet in height, which requires a waiver under the Municipal Code Section 9-4.1605 for the increase height as identified in Table 1 for each building. As shown on the simulations, portions of the buildings would be visible from the trails.
However, the buildings would not substantially change the view from the trails or scenic vista. In addition, the buildings would be painted with earth tones to blend in with the surrounding area and would avoid reflective material, where feasible. Perimeter landscaping will also be required to soften the views of the buildings. Furthermore, the buildings’ architecture would be similar in style, mass, and height as the existing Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 17 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 surrounding industrial buildings. As a result, the proposed project would not have an adverse effect on scenic vistas and impacts would be less than significant. b) No Impact. There are no officially designated state scenic highways within the vicinity of the proposed project, therefore, there would be no impact to scenic resources along a scenic highway (Caltrans, 2019).
c) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the current zoning or regulations detailed in the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan, nor Specific Plans 7 where the project is located. The project site is currently zoned as Industrial Park M-1 in the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan and as Employment Park in Specific Plan 7. Implementation of the proposed project in its proposed location would be consistent with current zoning and regulation regarding scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project once completed would introduce new light sources to the project area. These include lighting to illuminate parking areas, driveways, doorways, walkways, and signs, as well as light emitted from windows and vehicle headlights. However, all lighting installed at the project site would comply with existing City standards which currently require lighting to be shielded to prevent excessive light and glare. Impacts would be less than significant.
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed above, construction of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact on scenic vistas, scenic highways, and visual character.
Aesthetics impacts of the proposed cumulative projects, if any, would be addressed on a projectby-project basis and reviewed by the City. There would be three commercial developments and two residential developments within the vicinity of the project. Each cumulative project would be subject to planning and zoning requirements, as well as to design review by the City to ensure that each project design is consistent with established standards. Where potential impacts could occur, the City would require appropriate environmental review and analysis, and, if required, mitigation as appropriate. The proposed project would not conflict with the current zoning or architectural regulations detailed in the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan or Specific Plans 7.
As a result, the proposed project combined with other projects would not result in a cumulatively considerable aesthetic impact.
References
Caltrans, 2019. Scenic Highways. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architectureand-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways
!
!
!A
C
B
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\17xxxx\D170220_01_Thousand Oaks\03_MXDs_Projects\PD\Fig4_PhotoMap.mxd, janderson 1/21/2021 Source: Nearmap, 2020.
N
0 600
Feet Project Area
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 4
Photo /ocation Map
Conejo Center Dr
Conejo Spectrum St
Rancho Conejo Blvd
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 5
View from Location A
SOURCE: VisionScape Imagery
Existing View
Proposed View
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 6
View from Location B
SOURCE: VisionScape Imagery
Existing View
Proposed View
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 7
View from Location C
SOURCE: VisionScape Imagery
Existing View
Proposed View
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 22 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY 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 state’s inventory of forest land, including 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, or
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 non-agricultural
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 or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed project would be constructed on land designated by the California Department of Conservation’s (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as Urban/Built Up Land (DOC, 2020a). Construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in a change to the designation nor would the proposed project result in the conversion of any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) No Impact. The project site is not located on land under a Williamson Act Contract and is not located on land zoned for agricultural use (City of Thousand Oaks, 2020a). The proposed project would be located on land zoned as M-1 Zone (Industrial Park). As a result, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning or agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur. c,d) No Impact. The City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Land Use Elements and zoning maps do not include zoning categories related to forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned as Timberland Production (City of Thousand Oaks, 2020b). The proposed project Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 23 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 site is currently designation as Employment Pak and is zoned as Industrial Park M-1.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for forested land or timberland nor convert timberland or forested land to other uses, no impact would occur. e) No Impact. As discussed above, the project area is not located on land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, timberland, or forest land. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not convert farmland or forestland, and no impact would occur.
Cumulative Impacts
As described above in Agriculture and Forestry Resources, the project would not impact Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance or be located on Williamson Act land or forest land. The proposed project and cumulative projects are located in areas designated by the California DOC FMMP as Urban/Built Up Land. There are no cumulative projects that would impact agricultural or forest lands in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project, when considered in addition to the anticipated impacts of other projects in the cumulative scenario, would not contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts to agricultural resources.
References
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2020. Important Farmland Maps: Ventura County. Available online at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2016/, accessed on March 20, 2020.
City of Thousand Oaks. 2020a. City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Zoning. Available online at:
https://www.toaks.org/about-us/about-thousand-oaks/online-mapping, accessed March 20, 2020.
City of Thousand Oaks. 2020b. City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Land Use Map. Available online at: https://www.toaks.org/home/showdocument?id=330, accessed March 20, 2020
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 24 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Air Quality
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY —
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
b) 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?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) is responsible for attaining and maintaining air quality standards in the Ventura County portion of the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB) through a comprehensive program of planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues. The clean air strategy of VCAPCD includes preparation of plans for attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution. VCAPCD and the Ventura Council Association of Governments (VCOG) are responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP), which addresses federal and state Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. The VCAPCD has adopted Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the CAAQS and NAAQS. The VCAPCD Governing Board adopted the 2016 AQMP on February 14, 2017.
The proposed project is located within the Ventura County portion of the SCCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the VCAPCD for air quality planning and control. As such, VCAPCD’s 2016 AQMP is the applicable air quality plan for the proposed project.
Projects that are consistent with the regional population, housing, and employment forecasts identified by VCOG are considered to be consistent with the AQMP growth projections, since the forecast assumptions by VCOG forms the basis of the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP. Additionally, because VCOG’s regional growth forecasts are based upon, among other things, land uses designated in general plans, a project that is consistent with the land use designated in a general plan would also be consistent with the VCOG’s regional forecast projections, and thus also with the AQMP growth projections.
The proposed project would construct 15 industrial buildings and associated infrastructure such as parking lots and lighting. The project is a planned development as Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 25 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 discussed in the City of Thousand Oaks Rancho Conejo Specific Plan 7 (refer to Section XIV, Population and Housing). As the land-use and development within the proposed project was included in the General Plan updates as of 2015, the land-use and development were accounted for in the General Plan and the growth has therefore been included in the 2016 AQMP. As such, the proposed project would not change the regional growth forecasts as identified in the local General Plan or those of the 2016 AQMP.
Additionally, the proposed project construction would comply with VCAPCD Rule 55 requirements and the Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCM) to limit heavy duty diesel motor vehicle idling to no more than 5 minutes at any given time. These measures would also be imposed on other construction projects in the Air Basin as required, which would include each of the cumulative projects in the project area. Compliance with these applicable requirements is consistent with and meets or exceeds the AQMP requirements for control strategies intended to reduce emissions from construction equipment and activities. Furthermore, as detailed in III. Air Quality b) below, the projected construction emissions for criteria pollutants would not exceed the VCAPCD’s regional significance thresholds for construction activities with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1. In addition, operational activities would not exceed regional significance thresholds. This provides further evidence that the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP, and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure:
The following measure is required to reduce reactive organic gas (ROG) and nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions during construction of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: The following measures shall be implemented with respect to construction activities to reduce NOX and ROG emissions. These requirements shall be included in applicable bid documents and successful contractor(s) must demonstrate the ability to supply such equipment.
x The proposed project shall use typical off-road diesel-powered construction equipment that meets or exceeds the California Air Resource Board (CARB) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Tier 4 off-road emissions standards for equipment rated at 50 horsepower or greater. Such equipment will be outfitted with Best Available Control Technology (BACT) devices, including a CARB-certified Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filter or equivalent; and
x The following measures to mitigate ozone precursor emissions from construction motor vehicles when emissions exceed 25 pounds per day (VCAPCD, 2003):
o Minimize equipment idling time;
o Maintain equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturer’s specifications;
The following measures to mitigate ozone precursor emissions from construction g gp motor vehicles when emissions exceed 25 pounds per day (VCAPCD, 2003):
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 26 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 o Lengthen the construction period during smog season (May through October), to minimize the number of vehicles and equipment operating at the same time; and
o Use alternatively fueled construction equipment such as compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas, or electric, if feasible. x The proposed project shall either:
o Incorporate low VOC coatings such that non-parking lot/paving area coatings shall be an average of 150 grams per liter or less; or
o Extend architectural coating phases for each building to a minimum of 140 days.
o For overlapping construction architectural coating phases, incorporate low VOC coatings such that non-parking lot/paving area coatings shall be an average of 75 grams per liter or less.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The City of Thousand Oaks has not developed specific air quality thresholds for air quality impacts. However, as stated in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the above determinations. As such, the significance thresholds and analysis methodologies in VCAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook are used in evaluating project impacts. The VCAPCD ’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook focuses on reducing ozone precursor emissions, which includes ROGs (also referred to as volatile organic compounds [VOCs]) and NOX because these pollutants could jeopardize attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone in Ventura County. The other criteria pollutants of concern include: carbon monoxide (CO), which is a colorless and odorless gas and can cause dizziness, confusion, unconsciousness or even death at high levels; sulfur dioxide (SO2), which is also colorless and can cause asthma exacerbation, including bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms of respiratory irritation, such as wheezing, shortness of breath and chest tightness; and respirable and fine particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM10) and 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5), which can worsen respiratory diseases, including asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, leading to hospitalization and emergency department visits and respiratory mortality. These pollutants do not have significance thresholds provided by the VCAPCD. In lieu of VCAPCD thresholds for these criteria pollutants, the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds are used as screening criteria for the determination of significance. The City has determined that the SCAQMD’s significant thresholds for CO, SO2, PM10 and PM 2.5 provides a reasonable and thorough screening threshold for these criteria pollutants and SCAQMD is an established air basin that is adjacent to VCAPCD.
The City of Thousand Oaks has not
developed specific air quality thresholds for air quality impacts.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 27 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Construction
Proposed construction activities associated with the project would generate pollutant emissions from the following construction activities: (1) grading and site preparation; (2) building construction; (3) paving; and (4) architectural coating activities. These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, fumes, equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants. The amount of emissions generated on a daily basis would vary, depending on the intensity and types of construction activities occurring simultaneously.
Construction of proposed project is modeled to occur over seven phases beginning in 2021 and ending in 2027 with various phases occurring over different time periods. The seven phases are as follows with modeling details provided in Appendix A:
x Phase 1: Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D
x Phase 2: Buildings 1E, 1F, and 1G
x Phase 3: Building 2
x Phase 4: Building 3
x Phase 5: Buildings 5A and 5B
x Phase 6: Buildings 6A and 6B
x Phase 7: Buildings 4A and 4B
For the purposes of the air quality analysis, construction activities were modeled for the earliest potential time frame to provide for a conservative analysis. If construction is delayed and begins subsequent to 2021, the emissions presented in this IS/MND would be conservative as emissions occurring in future years would be lower than those analyzed herein due to the use of a more energy-efficient and cleaner burning construction vehicle fleet mix, pursuant to State regulations that require vehicle fleet operators to phase-in less polluting heavy-duty equipment. Construction activity would be limited to Monday through Friday except on federal holidays. Assumptions, including detailed phasing, and modeling output are included in Appendix A.
Construction emissions are considered short term and temporary, but have the potential to represent a significant impact with respect to air quality. Emissions of ozone precursors and particulate matter tend to be of potential concern given that the Ventura County portion of the SCCAB is designated as nonattainment for ozone (NAAQS and CAAQA) and PM10 (CAAQS). Emissions of ozone precursors ROG and NOX are primarily generated from heavy-duty equipment and motor vehicle exhaust and vary as a function of vehicle trips per day associated with debris hauling, delivery of construction materials, vendor trips, and worker commute trips, and the types and number of heavy-duty, offroad equipment used and the intensity and frequency of their operation. In addition, construction-related ROG emissions also result from the application of architectural coatings and vary depending on the amount of coatings applied each day. Particulate matter (i.e., PM10 and PM2.5) is among the pollutants of greatest localized concern with Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 28 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 respect to construction activities given that particulate concentrations tend to be higher near the source of the emissions. Particulate emissions from construction activities can lead to adverse health effects and nuisance concerns, such as reduced visibility and soiling of exposed surfaces. Particulate emissions can result from a variety of construction activities, including excavation, grading, demolition, vehicle travel on paved and unpaved surfaces, and vehicle and equipment exhaust. Construction emissions of PM can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the number, and types of equipment operated, local soil conditions, weather conditions, and the amount of earth disturbance.
It is mandatory for all construction projects in the SCCAB to comply with VCAPCD Rule 55 for controlling fugitive dust. Incorporating Rule 55 into the proposed project reduces regional PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from construction activities. Specific Rule 55 control requirements may include, but are not limited to, applying water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes, applying soil binders to uncovered areas, reestablishing ground cover as quickly as possible, utilizing a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle undercarriages before vehicles exit the proposed project site, covering all trucks hauling soil with a fabric cover and maintaining a freeboard height of 12 inches, and maintaining effective cover over exposed areas. Compliance with Rule 55 was accounted for in the construction emissions modeling.
Table 3 summarizes the modeled peak daily emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors associated with the proposed project for each individual construction phase as well as for overlaps where construction of different phases occurs at the same time.5 As shown in Table 3, the maximum daily construction emissions generated by the proposed project’s worst-case construction scenario would exceed VCAPCD’s daily significance threshold for ROG and NOX. Therefore, the proposed project would result in potentially significant construction emission impacts.
Incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce criteria pollutant emissions, specifically with respect to ROG and NOX. As shown in Table 4, with incorporation of mitigation, emissions of ROG and NOX would be reduced to below the significance thresholds6. The other criteria pollutants evaluated would remain below the screening levels. Therefore, with incorporation of mitigation measure AQ-1, the proposed project’s construction emission impacts would be less than significant. 5 The maximum daily unmitigated construction emissions are associated with overlapping construction of phases 1 (Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D) and 2 (Buildings 1E, 1F, and 1G). 6 The maximum daily mitigated construction emissions are associated with overlapping construction of phases 1 (Buildings 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D) and 2 (Buildings 1E, 1F, and 1G).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 29 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 TABLE 3
MAXIMUM DAILY UNMITIGATED REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Maximum Regional Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Grading 9 96 65 <1 4 4
Building Construction (BC) 6 60 34 <1 3 2
Paving 3 25 21 <1 1 1
Architectural Coating (AC) 73 3 4 <1 <1 <1
BC/Paving/AC 82 88 59 <1 4 4
Maximum Daily Emissions a 82 96 65 <1 4 4
Significance Thresholds / Screening Levels 25 b 25 b 550 c 150 c 150 c 55 c Significant Impact? Yes Yes No No No No
a Maximum daily emissions are the sum of the overlapping construction phases that result in the greatest emissions on a peak day of construction. Note: All emissions shown above include VCAPCD Rule 55 fugitive dust reduction measures. b VCAPCD Significance Threshold.
c Screening Level based on SCAQMD.
SOURCE: ESA, 2021
TABLE 4
MAXIMUM DAILY MITIGATED REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Maximum Regional Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Grading 2 11 70 <1 <1 <1
Building Construction (BC) 1 6 41 <1 <1 <1
Paving 1 4 26 <1 <1 <1
Architectural Coating (AC) 23 <1 4 <1 <1 <1
BC/Paving/AC 25 11 71 <1 <1 <1
Maximum Daily Emissions a 25 11 70 <1 <1 <1
Significance Thresholds / Screening Levels 25 b 25 b 550 c 150 c 150 c 55 c Significant Impact? No No No No No No
a Maximum daily emissions are the sum of the overlapping construction phases that result in the greatest emissions on a peak day of construction. Note: All emissions shown above include VCAPCD Rule 55 fugitive dust reduction measures. b VCAPCD Significance Threshold.
c Screening Level based on SCAQMD.
SOURCE: ESA, 2021
Operation
Proposed operational activities associated with the project would generate criteria pollutant and ozone precursor emissions from the following: (1) building energy Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 30 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 consumption; (2) building maintenance; and (3) worker/customer vehicle trips. Project operations are anticipated to begin in 2023 with final buildout between 2027 and 2040.
As emission rates related to energy consumption and vehicle exhaust decline in future years due to the adoption and implementation of more stringent building energy and vehicle emissions standards, emissions from the initial year of operation as well as both buildout years are reported herein. As shown in Table 5, emissions would be below significance thresholds for all operational years. Therefore, emissions from the implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant.
TABLE 5
MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Maximum Regional Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Initial Operational Year 2023
Area Source 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 3 4 22 <1 6 2
Total 5 4 22 <1 6 2
Buildout Operational Year 2027
Area Source 13 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 5 7 38 <1 13 3
Total 18 7 38 <1 13 3
Buildout Operational Year 2040
Area Source 13 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 3 5 29 <1 13 3
Total 16 5 29 <1 13 3
Maximum Daily Emissions a 18 7 38 <1 13 3
Significance Thresholds / Screening
Levels 25 b
25 b 550 c 150 c 150 c 55 c
Significant Impact? No No No No No No
a Maximum daily emissions are the sum of the overlapping construction phases that result in the greatest emissions on a peak day of construction. Note: All emissions shown above include VCAPCD Rule 55 fugitive dust reduction measures. b VCAPCD Significance Threshold.
c Screening Level based on SCAQMD.
SOURCE: ESA, 2021
Cumulative
The geographic scope for regional air quality impacts consists of the air basin(s) in which project emissions would occur. The VCAPCD’s approach for assessing cumulative Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 31 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 impacts is based on attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the CAA and California Clean Air Act. As discussed earlier, the VCAPCD has developed a comprehensive plan, the 2016 AQMP, which addresses the region’s cumulative air quality condition. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) provides guidance in determining the significance of cumulative impacts, stating in part that:
A lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program which provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem (e.g., water quality control plan, air quality plan, integrated waste management plan) within the geographic area in which the project is located. Such plans or programs must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency.
For purposes of the cumulative air quality analysis with respect to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project’s incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts is determined based on compliance with the VCAPCD’s adopted 2016 AQMP. With respect to the project’s short-term construction-related air quality emissions and cumulative conditions, VCAPCD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the AQMP pursuant to the federal CAA mandates. Construction of the project would comply with VCAPCD Rule 55 fugitive dust control requirements and the ATCM to limit heavy duty diesel motor vehicle idling to no more than 5 minutes at any location. These measures would also be imposed on construction projects in the Air Basin, which would include the cumulative projects in the project area. Additionally, with respect to operational emissions, the project’s emissions would be less than the significance thresholds as shown in Table 5, and as detailed in III. Air Quality a) above is consistent with the AQMP. Since the project’s construction and operational emissions do not exceed the VCAPCD’s regional significance thresholds, and the proposed project is consistent with the AQMP, cumulative construction impacts would be less than significant. Furthermore, the project is a planned development as discussed in the City of Thousand Oaks Rancho Conejo Specific Plan 7. As such, the project would not induce growth that is not accounted for by the City of Thousand Oaks. The proposed project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with AQMP growth assumptions and cumulative construction and operational impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact. Separate discussions are provided below analyzing the potential for sensitive receptors to be exposed to localized air quality impacts from toxic air contaminants (TACs) from on-site sources during project construction and operations, and CO hotspots during operation from the increase in vehicle operation in the local area.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 32 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Sensitive receptors are individuals who are considered more sensitive to air pollutants than others. The reasons for greater than average sensitivity may include pre-existing health problems, proximity to emissions sources, or duration of exposure to air pollutants.
Schools, hospitals, and convalescent homes are considered to be relatively sensitive to poor air quality because children, elderly people, and the infirm are more susceptible to respiratory distress and other air quality-related health problems than the general public.
Residential areas are considered sensitive to poor air quality because people usually stay home for extended periods of time, with associated greater exposure to ambient air quality. The nearest sensitive receptors would be located 1,250 feet or more away from the project site.
CO Hotspots
Emissions of CO are generated in greatest quantities from motor vehicle combustion of fossil fuels, and are usually concentrated at or near ground level because they do not readily disperse into the atmosphere, particularly under cool, stable (i.e., low or no wind) atmospheric conditions. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed State and/or federal standards are termed CO hotspots. The VCAPCD uses a screening analysis to determine the potential for CO Hotspots for any project with indirect emissions greater than the applicable ozone project significance levels as analyzed under III. Air Quality b) above where roadway intersections are currently operating at or are expected to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) of E or F. As indicated in Table 5 above, the proposed project would not exceed regulatory thresholds for ROG or NOX. Additionally, as indicated in the project specific traffic analysis, the LOS for existing plus project would result in a maximum PM peak hour LOS of D with implemented mitigation, and for the buildout scenario a maximum LOS of D would occur without mitigation (Kimley Horn, 2020).
Therefore, as the proposed project does not exceed regulatory thresholds and the project would not result in an LOS of E or F, a refined CO hotspot analysis is not warranted, and the project would be less than significant with respect to CO impacts.
Localized Construction Air Quality Impacts – TACs
Project construction would result in short-term emissions of diesel PM, a TAC. Diesel PM poses a carcinogenic health risk that is measured using an exposure period of 70 years for a lifetime exposure or 30 years for a residential exposure. The exhaust of offroad heavy-duty diesel equipment would emit diesel PM during demolition, site preparation (e.g., clearing); site grading and excavation; paving; installation of utilities, materials transport, and handling; building construction; and other miscellaneous activities. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., the potential exposure to TACs to be compared to applicable standards). Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the maximally exposed individual. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), carcinogenic Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 33 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70-year exposure period for a lifetime exposure or 30 years for a residential exposure; however, such assessments should be limited to the period or duration of activities associated with the proposed project.
The construction period for the proposed project is approximately 84 months between 2021 and 2040. However, construction activities would not be continuous between 2021 and 2040 and there would be periods of inactivity. The emissions modeling analysis presented in b) above provides for a conservative assessment of the project’s construction activities by assuming construction at the earliest time frame, which assumes the use of the most conservative emission factors. Furthermore, the analysis assumes heavy-duty equipment usage for each day of the various construction phases. In reality, not all equipment would necessarily be used over the whole of the construction period or individual construction phases or sub-phases with some equipment used only periodically.
Additionally, the dispersion of TACs in the atmosphere occurs relatively rapidly and pollutant concentrations are decreased by 80 percent between 50 and 1,000 feet from the pollutant source based on type emissions (CARB 2005). For example, concentrations of TACs as a result of emissions from freeways, high-traffic roads, distribution centers, and rail yards (all high emitters of diesel particulate matter) are reduced by approximately 80 percent within 1,000 feet of the source (CARB 2005). Given that the primary TAC from project construction activities would consist of diesel particulate matter and that the nearest sensitive receptors would be located 1,250 feet or more away from the project site, a health risk would not be warranted for the project as emissions would be substantially dispersed.
Given the short duration of emissions per phase, and the fact that the nearest receptors are greater than 1,000 feet from the project site (the residential development to the east of Rancho Conejo Boulevard), the project would not result in substantial risk for the nearby residents. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and impacts would be less than significant. It is noted that the incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, as required in III. Air Quality b) above, would further reduce diesel particulate matter emissions from construction activities and further reduce the risk potential.
Project Operations – TACs
Typical sources of acutely and chronically hazardous TACs include industrial manufacturing processes, automotive repair facilities, and dry-cleaning facilities. The project would not include any of these potential sources, although minimal emissions may result from the use of consumer products. Although the light industrial nature of the project would increase diesel trucks on the site and at the local roadways, the proposed project is greater than 1,000 feet from the nearest receptors as discussed under construction above. Therefore, while the proposed project is not anticipated to result in the level of truck traffic associated with distribution centers, the distance between the Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 34 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 project site and the nearest receptors reduces the potential impacts from operational emissions with respect to TACs to less than significant levels.
Valley Fever
Valley Fever is an infective disease caused by the fungus, Coccidioides immiti. Infection occurs via inhalation of Coccidioides immiti spores that have become airborne from the upturn of dry, dusty soil by wind, construction, farming, or other activities. The project site meets the following factors that indicate it has the potential to create significant Valley Fever impacts. The project would excavate impacted soils that could result in the disturbance of the top 12 inches. In addition, the site contains areas of dry and sandy soils, undisturbed soils, and may be subject to periodic windy conditions. Based on these factors, the site could contain Coccidioides immiti spores that could be disturbed by proposed construction activities, which may result in a potentially significant Valley fever impact. VCAPCD’s Rule 55 advises workers to wear proper respiratory protection during the cleanup, but excavation of topsoil and wind gusts could carry spores to other areas of the site and reach workers indirectly involved. The overall site cleanup would be consistent with the VCAPCD’s Rule 55. Abidance by both the local and regional AQMPs ensures that fugitive dust would be minimized by means of regularly watering excavation areas, covering truck loads, curtailing operations during high winds, and weekly monitoring conducted by the construction manager. The site may also be subject to soil stabilization and roll-compaction if deemed necessary.
Risk of exposure is further reduced by the setting of the project site and its distance from sensitive receptors. Coccidioides immiti grows in undisturbed, unfertilized areas usually away from developments. The site area is partially developed with paved roads and buildings, although there are some locations that could possibly harbor Coccidioides immiti growth. The nearest sensitive receptors are located over 1,000 feet from the project site as detailed above. Additionally, most (60 percent) of individuals are asymptomatic and require no medical attention from being exposed to the spores (VFCE 2021). Controlled construction practices to prevent fugitive dust make the spreading of Valley Fever to surrounding communities unlikely.
Onsite workers are the most at risk of contracting Valley Fever, due to their proximity to the potentially impacted soils. The project site has been previously disturbed, thus reducing the potential for impacts, however due to the undeveloped nature of the project site, there is a potential for exposure that can be further reduced with implementation of mitigation. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, impacts to workers and the surrounding community would be reduced to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure:
The following measure is required to reduce PM emissions from the construction of the proposed project.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 35 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 AQ-2: During heavy grading where the top 12 to 18 inches of soil would be disturbed, construction contractors shall comply with the following measures, as feasible to reduce potential Valley Fever impacts (VCAPCD 2003):
x Restrict employment for grading activities to persons with positive coccidioidin skin tests (since those with positive tests can be considered immune to reinfection).
x Hire crews from local populations where possible, since it is more likely that they have been previously exposed to the fungus and are therefore immune. x Require crews to use respirators during project clearing, grading, and excavation operations in accordance with California Division of Occupational Safety and Health regulations.
x Require that the cabs of grading and construction equipment to be airconditioned or enclosed with sufficient ventilation and particulate matter filtration systems.
x Require crews to work upwind from excavation sites where possible. x Where acceptable to the fire department, control weed growth by mowing instead of disking, thereby leaving the ground undisturbed and with a mulch covering. x During rough grading and construction, the access way into the project site from adjoining paved roadways should be paved or treated with environmentally-safe dust control agents.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact. Potential activities that may emit odors during construction include the use of architectural coatings and solvents, as well as the combustion of diesel fuel in on-and off-road equipment. In addition, the Proposed project would comply with the applicable provisions of the CARB Air Toxics Control Measure regarding idling limitations for diesel trucks. Through mandatory compliance with VCAPCD Rules, no construction activities or materials are expected to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Furthermore, as shown in Table 4, construction emissions would not exceed the screening levels for attainment, maintenance, or unclassifiable criteria air pollutants (i.e., CO, SO2, and PM2.5).
During construction of the proposed project, exhaust from equipment and activities associated with the application of architectural coatings and other interior and exterior finishes may produce discernible odors typical of most construction sites. Such odors would be a temporary source of nuisance to adjacent uses, but would not affect a substantial number of people. As odors associated with project construction would be temporary and intermittent in nature, the odors would not be considered to be a significant environmental impact. Therefore, construction activities would result in lessthan-significant impacts with respect to other emissions, including those leading to odors.
Proposed project operations in the office and warehouse/light manufacturing spaces would be similar to operational activities in other nearby similar office and warehouse/light manufacturing spaces. As discussed in Section 1.0, Project Description, nearby land uses as identified in the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan include Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 36 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 “Industrial,” “Institutional, and “Existing Parks, and Open Space” (City of Thousand Oaks, 2015). Adjacent to the project Site to the north and west is land that is owned and managed by the Conejo Open Space Conservation Area (COSCA). Industrial development is located northeast of the project site as well as to the south and west of the proposed project site. The southern portions of the Rancho Conejo Industrial Area have been developed resulting in a biotech corridor with companies such as Amgen and Teledyne Technologies. The proposed project would not introduce operations that the VCAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook considers to be potential sources of substantial odors, such as wastewater treatment facilities; sanitary landfills; transfer stations; composting facilities; asphalt batch plants; painting and coating operations; fiberglass operations; food processing facilities; feed lots/ dairies; petroleum extraction, transfer, processing, and refining operations and facilities; chemical manufacturing operations and facilities; or rendering plants. As such, the proposed project would not introduce noise sources of substantial emissions, such as those leading to odors, to the area. Operational activities would result in less-than-significant impacts with respect to other emissions, including those leading to odors.
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed above in Air Quality, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts is determined based on compliance with the VCAPCD’s adopted 2016 AQMP. With respect to the project’s short-term construction-related air quality emissions and cumulative conditions, VCAPCD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the AQMP pursuant to the federal CAA mandates. Construction of the project would comply with VCAPCD Rule 55 fugitive dust control requirements and the ATCM to limit heavy duty diesel motor vehicle idling to no more than 5 minutes at any location. These measures would also be imposed on construction projects in the Air Basin, which would include the cumulative projects in the project area. Additionally, with respect to operational emissions, the project’s emissions would be less than the significance thresholds as shown in Table 5, and as detailed in III. Air Quality a) above is consistent with the AQMP. Since the project’s construction and operational emissions do not exceed the VCAPCD’s regional significance thresholds, and the proposed project is consistent with the AQMP, cumulative construction impacts would be less than significant.
References
California Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency; 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.
CARB, News Release - CARB establishes next generation of emission controls needed to improve state’s air quality, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-establishes-next-generationemission-controls-needed-improve-states-air-quality. Accessed February 25, 2020.
Kimley Horn 2020. Shapell Traffic Study. May 15.
VCAPCD 2003. Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines. October. Available:
http://www.vcapcd.org/environmental-review.htm.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 37 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 VCAPCD 2017. Final 2016 Ventura County Air Quality Management Plan. February 14.
Available: http://www.vcapcd.org/pubs/Planning/AQMP/2016/Final/Final-2016-VenturaCounty-AQMP.pdf VFCE 2021. College of Medicine Tuscon Valley Fever Center for Excellence. Valley Fever in People | Valley Fever Center for Excellence (arizona.edu).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 38 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Biological Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
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,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (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?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Prior to conducting a site visit, ESA conducted a query of available resource inventory databases to analyze the potential for sensitive resources to occur within the study area:
x California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020a. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). Database was queried for special status species records in the Newbury Park USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles including Camarillo, Moorpark, Point Dume, Point Mugu, Santa Paula, Simi, Thousand Oaks, and Triunfo Pass.
Accessed September 11, 2020.
x California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020b. California Natural Community List. Sacramento, CA: CDFW, Natural Heritage Division. Accessed September 11, 2020. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=153398&inline x California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Database was queried for special status species records in the Newbury Park USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle and eight surrounding quadrangles including Camarillo, Moorpark, Point Dume, Point Mugu, Santa Paula, Simi, Thousand Oaks, and Triunfo Pass.
Accessed September 11, 2020.
x U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020a. Critical Habitat Portal. Accessed September 11, 2020. https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265 ad4fe09893cf75b8dbfb77
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 39 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 x U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020b. Information for Planning and Consultation.
Accessed September 11, 2020.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DA5TIRE4ZVGADPX2SXYNFBX6IA/resources Biological Resources Assessment
A biological resources assessment was conducted by an ESA biologist on February 26, 2020. The survey consisted of walking transects throughout the study area to characterize and map natural communities, and to determine the potential for special-status plants and wildlife to occur. All incidental, visual observations of flora and fauna, including sign (i.e., presence of scat) as well as any audible detections, were noted during the site visit and are described in further detail below.
All native and non-native natural communities and land use were characterized and delineated on aerial photographs during the field survey, and subsequently digitized using a Geographic Information System software (ArcGIS). Each description of vegetation was characterized in reference to the Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties, California, Version 1-Association Level and Specific Alliances (CDFG et al 2006) and Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland1986). In instances where an appropriate description was not available within the aforementioned publications, the community or land use was described based on species dominance or any other apparent, defining characteristic. A detailed description of each natural community and land use is provided below.
Focused Rare Plant Survey
Due to the presence of suitable habitat for special-status rare plants, observed during the biological resources assessment, a subsequent focused rare plant survey was conducted on June 30, 2021, by ESA. The focused survey was conducted in accordance with the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018) and involved conducting survey transects throughout all accessible portions of the survey area with suitable habitat (e.g., vegetation, soils, slope, disturbance).
General Description of Project Site
The project site is located within previously graded undeveloped parcels, adjacent to existing commercial and industrial developments to the south and east, and open space (i.e., Conejo Canyons Open Space Area) to the north and west. The surrounding open space areas are comprised of minimally disturbed, native vegetation communities, bisected by hiking trails and dirt and paved roads. In contrast, the project site is heavily disturbed with a prevalence of nonnative vegetation. Review of historic aerial imagery ranging between 1994 and 2002 indicates that much of the project site has undergone various degrees of grading and/or grubbing activity (USDSG 2020) and the adjacent COSCA land was burned during the 2018 Woolsey fire.
Plant Communities
A total of five (5) disturbed plant communities were mapped within the project site that include California Buckwheat Scrub, coastal sage scrub, coastal sage scrub-California buckwheat scrub, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 40 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 non-native grassland and Disturbed. Plant communities located within the project site are summarized in Table 6 and depicted in Figure 8, Plant Communities.
TABLE 6
PLANT COMMUNITIES WITHIN PROJECT SITE
Plant Community Acres within Project Site
Disturbed California Buckwheat Scrub 9.05
Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub 6.18
Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub-California Buckwheat Scrub 2.26 Disturbed Non-native Grassland 32.21
Disturbed 1.64
Disturbed California Buckwheat Scrub
Disturbed California buckwheat scrub was mapped within the southwest portion of the project site, to the west of Conejo Center Drive, and immediately to the west of Rancho Conejo Boulevard.
Vegetation within this area is characterized by a sparse shrub layer dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), interspersed with various other large shrub and sub-shrub species that include deerweed (Acmispon glaber), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia) and sawtooth goldenbush (Hazardia squarrosa). This community supports a dense herbaceous layer of native and non-native forbs that include tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), common sandaster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia) and interspersed with various other species that include clustered tarweed (Deinandra fasciculata), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), sweetclover (Melilotus sp.), two-color rabbit-tobacco (Pseudognaphalium biolettii), and vinegarweed (Trichostema lanceolatum).
Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub
Disturbed coastal sage scrub was mapped within the northern portion of the project site, north and west of Rancho Conejo Boulevard. Vegetation within this area is characterized by a sparse shrub layer comprised of various species that include chamise (Adenostema fasciculatum), California buckwheat, California sagebrush, coyote brush, deerweed, giant ryegrass (Elymus condensatus), chaparral yucca (Hesperoyucca whipplei), lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia), purple sage (Salvia leucophylla) and sawtooth goldenbush. This community supports an herbaceous layer ranging between sparse and moderately dense, and supports various native and non-native species that include black mustard (Brassica nigra), deerweed, telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), shortpod mustard and tocalote.
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\17xxxx\D170220_01_Thousand Oaks\03_MXDs_Projects\PD\Fig8_Plant_Communities.mxd, JNielsen 8/5/2021 Source: Nearmap, 2020.
N
0 400
Feet
Project Area
Plant Community
Disturbed California Buckwheat Scrub
Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub
Disturbed Coastal Sage ScrubCalifornia Buckwheat Scrub Disturbed Non-Native Grassland
Disturbed
Coast Live Oak Location
Conejo Summit Project
Figure 8
Plant Communities
Conejo Center Dr
Conejo Spectrum St
Rancho Conejo Blvd
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 42 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub-California Buckwheat Scrub Disturbed coastal sage scrub-California buckwheat scrub was mapped within the southwest portion of the project site, adjacent to the disturbed California buckwheat scrub and non-native grassland. This community is very similar in character to the coastal sage scrub community described above; however, supports a shrub layer dominated by California buckwheat.
Disturbed Non-Native Grassland
Disturbed non-native grassland was mapped within the southwest portion of the project site, to the east and west of the Conejo Center Drive, and in the northern portion of the project site, to north and west of Rancho Conejo Boulevard. This community is characterized by a dense herbaceous layer, primarily of non-native grasses and forbs that include wild oats (Avena sp.), black mustard, ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Russian thistle (Salsola sp.), shortpod mustard and tocalote.
Disturbed
Disturbed land use was mapped throughout the southwest portion of the project site, west of Conejo Center Drive and consists of dirt access roads that appear to have been created and maintained by heavy OHV use. These areas largely devoid of vegetation; however, sparse shrub, grass and forb cover was observed throughout. Species observed include California buckwheat, shortpod mustard, sweetclover, tocalote and vinegarweed.
Common Wildlife
Various common wildlife species were observed within or immediately adjacent to the project site during the biological assessment that include California quail (Callipepla californica), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), lesser goldfinch (Spinus psaltria), Cassin’s kingbird (Tyrranus vociferans) and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura).
Few fossorial mammal burrows were observed interspersed throughout the project site. Based on morphology, these are likely inhabited by California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi) and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae).
Special-Status Wildlife Species
Special-status wildlife is defined as those animals that, because of their recognized rarity or vulnerability to various forms of habitat loss or population decline, are recognized by federal, state, or other agencies as under threat from human-associated developments. Some of these species receive specific protection that is defined by federal or state endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as special status on the basis of adopted policies and the expertise of state resource agencies or other respected organizations, or policies adopted by local governmental agencies such as counties, cities, and special districts to meet local conservation objectives. Special-status wildlife is defined as follows:
x Animals listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11 for listed animals and various notice sin the Federal Register for proposed species).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 43 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 x Animals that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, December 2, 2016). x Animals that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under the CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380).
x Animals listed, proposed for listing, or identified as candidate species for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (14 CCR 670.5).
x Animal species of special concern to the CDFW (Shuford & Gardali 2008 for birds; Williams 1986 for mammals; Moyle et al. 1995 for fish; and Jennings & Hayes 1994 for amphibians and reptiles).
x Animal species that are fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code, Sections 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians]). x Ventura County Locally Important Animal Species (updated 2014).
A search of the most current CNDDB (CDFW, 2020a) records for the study area revealed that numerous special-status wildlife species have been previously recorded within a search area defined as the Newbury Park 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle map and surrounding eight USGS quadrangle maps. A complete list of the species generated in the CNDDB query are provided in Appendix B. Based on absence of suitable habitat, known geographic distributions and/or range restrictions, it was determined that many of these species do not have potential to occur within the study area (e.g., fish and aquatic species) and are therefore omitted from further discussion. A total of thirteen (13) special-status wildlife species, presented below in Table 7, were determined to have a low to high potential to occur, or were determined to be present onsite, based on the following criteria:
x Low Potential: The project site supports limited habitat for a particular species. For example, the appropriate vegetation assemblage may be present while the substrate preferred by the species may be absent.
x Moderate Potential: The project site provides marginal habitat for a particular species. For example, the habitat may meet all criteria necessary to support a species; however, is heavily disturbed, sufficient to reduce suitability; or may only support certain (i.e., Adult, or larval) stages of a species life cycle.
x High Potential: The project site provides suitable habitat conditions for a particular species and/or known populations occur in the immediate vicinity. x Present: The species itself, or verifiable sign of presence was observed onsite during the site visit; or has been reported within the project site in the past and it is reasonable to assume that it remains extant.
Special-status wildlife species were not observed within or immediately adjacent to the project site during the site visit; however, those with a moderate or high potential to occur within the project site include the coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris ssp. stejnegeri), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) and San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida ssp. intermedia).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 44 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 TABLE 7
POTENTIALLY OCCURRING SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE Common and Scientific
Name Status Habitat Potential to Occur within Project Site Insects
Crotch bumble bee
(Bombus crotchii)
SCE Found in grassland and scrub
habitat with abundant forage
plants that primarily include those
within the following families:
Apocynaceae, Asclepiadaceae,
Asteraceae, Boraginaceae,
Fabaceae, Hydrophyllaceae, and
Lamiaceae (CDFW 2019).
Low. Low quality scrub habitat is
present within the project site and while
flowering plants that may be utilized by
the species are present, they are not
sufficiently abundant.
Santa Monica
grasshopper
(Trimerotropis
occidentiloides)
SA Found on bare hillsides and
disturbed openings in chaparral
vegetation communities. .
Low. Suitable chaparral vegetation is
not present within the project site.
Reptiles
Coastal whiptail
(Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri)
SSC Found in deserts & semiarid
scrub/chaparral communities with
sparse vegetation.
High. Suitable habitat for the species is
present throughout the disturbed scrub
communities located within the project
site.
Coast horned lizard
(Phrynosoma blainvillii)
SSC Found within chaparral,
cismontane woodland, coastal
bluff scrub, coastal scrub, desert
wash, pinon & juniper woodlands,
riparian scrub, riparian woodland,
and valley & foothill grassland.
Frequents a wide variety of
habitats, most common in
lowlands along sandy washes
with scattered low bushes. Open
areas for sunning, bushes for
cover, patches of loose soil for
burial, and abundant supply of
ants and other insects.
Moderate. Marginal habitat for this
species is present in the disturbed scrub
communities located within the project
site.
Birds
Sharp-shinned hawk
(Accipiter striatus)
WL Found in riparian areas. Nests
usually within 275 feet of water.
Low (Nesting). Suitable foraging habitat
exists throughout the scrub and
grassland communities; however,
suitable nesting habitat (trees with
adjacent water) is not present on or
within 500 feet of the project site.
Golden eagle
(Aquila chrysaetos)
FP, WL Forages throughout grassland,
chaparral, shrubland, forest, and
other vegetated areas and nests
exclusively within cliffs.
Low (Nesting). Suitable foraging habitat
exists throughout the scrub and
grassland communities; however,
suitable nesting habitat (cliffs) are not
present on or within 500 feet of the
project site.
Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
SSC Found in low-lying grassdominated areas located within lower elevations and presence of
mammal burrows or manmade
structures, such as irrigation
pipes, culverts, and debris
stockpiles.
Low (Foraging and Nesting). Scrub
and grassland plant communities known
to support this species are present
within the project site; however, the
herbaceous layer is likely too dense to
support wintering or breeding activities.
Furthermore, few fossorial mammal
burrows with appropriate morphology to
support owl occupancy were observed
during the survey.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 45 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Common and Scientific
Name Status Habitat Potential to Occur within Project Site Coastal cactus wren
(Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus)
SSC Found in various scrub and
chaparral vegetation communities
with a prominence of prickly pear
(Opuntia littoralis) or coastal
cholla (Cylindropuntia prolifera) to
nest (Solex et. al. 2004).
Low (Nesting). Marginal foraging
habitat is present throughout the scrub
communities; however, cactus,
necessary for nesting, is not present
within the Project site. This species may
nest within 500 feet of the project site.
White-tailed kite
(Elanus leucurus)
FP Found in open grasslands,
meadows, or marshes for
foraging close to isolated, densetopped trees for nesting and perching.
Low (Nesting). Suitable foraging habitat
exists throughout the scrub and
grassland communities; however,
suitable nesting habitat in not present
within the project site. This species may
nest within 500 feet of the project site.
Loggerhead shrike
(Lanius ludovicianus)
SSC Found in open scrub and
chaparral communities.
Marginal (Foraging and Nesting).
Marginal foraging and nesting habitat is
present throughout the Project site.
Coastal California
gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica
californica)
FT, SSC Inhabits dry coastal slopes,
washes, and mesas. They are
restricted to areas of coastal
sage scrub below 2,000 feet in
elevation. This species is
considered non-migratory and
tends to remain within its territory
year-round (USFWS 2010).
Low. Low quality scrub habitat is
present within areas of the project site
dominated by California buckwheat;
however, the level of disturbance (i.e.,
historic site grading and recent fire) to
the vegetation is such that this species
is unlikely to occupy the site. Moreover,
this resident species was not observed
utilizing the site during the site visit.
However, this species may nest within
500 feet of the project site.
Mammals
San Diego desert woodrat
(Neotoma lepida
intermedia)
SSC Occurs in moderate to dense
canopies. They are particularly
abundance in rock outcrops,
rocky cliffs, and slopes within
coastal scrub.
Marginal. Marginal foraging and habitat
and limited nest building sites (shrubs of
sufficient size) are present within the
project site.
Mountain lion
(Puma concolor)
SCT Inhabits a wide range of
ecosystems, making its home
anywhere there is shelter and
prey, including mountains,
forests, deserts, and wetlands.
They are territorial and have
naturally low population densities,
which means the species
requires large swaths of habitat
to thrive. Present in the Santa
Monica Mountains.
Low. This species is known to occur
within the general vicinity and may utilize
the project site for foraging and
movement to a limited degree; however,
is much more likely to depend on the
undisturbed open space that surrounds
the project site.
Federal/State/Other Status:
FT – Federally Protected; SCE – State Candidate Endangered, SCT – State Candidate Threatened, FP – State Fully Protected, SSC – State Species of Special Concern, SA – State Special Animal, WL – State watch List SOURCE: ESA 2020
Special-Status Plant Species
For the purposes of this evaluation, special-status plant species include:
x Plants listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.12 for listed plants and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 46 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 x Plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, December 2, 2016). x Plants that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under the CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380).
x Plants considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be “rare, threatened, or endangered” in California (California Rare Plant Ranks 1B and 2B). x Plants listed by CNPS as plants about which we need more information and plants of limited distribution (California Rare Plant Ranks 3 and 4).
x Plants listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (14 CCR 670.5). x Plants listed under the California Native Plant Protection Act (California Fish and Game Code 1900 et seq.).
x Plants considered sensitive by other Federal agencies (i.e., U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management), State and local agencies or jurisdictions. x Plants considered sensitive or unique by the scientific community or occurring at the limits of its natural range (State CEQA Guidelines).
x Ventura County Locally Important Plant Species (updated 2014).
A search of the most current CNDDB (CDFW, 2020a) and CNPS (CNPS, 2020) records for the study area revealed that numerous special-status plant species have been previously recorded within a search area defined as the Newbury Park 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle map and surrounding eight USGS quadrangle maps. A complete list of the species generated in the CNDDB query are provided in Appendix B. Based on absence of suitable habitat, known geographic distributions and/or range restrictions, it was determined that many of these species do not have potential to occur within the project site and are therefore omitted from further discussion. A total of 12 special-status plant species, presented below in Table 8, were determined to have a low to high potential to occur, or were determined to be present onsite, based on the following criteria:
x Absent: Species is a perennial tree that is easily identifiable during all seasons, and was not observed within the project site.
x Low Potential: The project site supports limited habitat for a particular species. For example, the appropriate vegetation assemblage may be present while the substrate preferred by the species may be absent.
x Moderate Potential: The project site provides marginal habitat for a particular species. For example, the habitat may meet all criteria necessary to support a species; however, is heavily disturbed, sufficient to reduce suitability.
x High Potential: The project site provides suitable habitat conditions for a particular species and/or known populations occur in the immediate vicinity. x Present: The species itself, or verifiable sign of presence was observed onsite during the site visit; or has been reported within the project site in the past and it is reasonable to assume that it remains extant.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 47 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Special-status plant species were not observed within or immediately adjacent to the project site during the initial biological resources assessment; however, based on the presence of suitable habitat, it was determined that the Catalina mariposa lily (Calochortus catalinae), Plummer’s mariposa lily (C. plummerae), club haired mariposa-lily (C. clavatus var. clavatus), slender mariposa lily (C.c.gracilis), southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), Ojai navarretia (Navarretia ojaiensis) and Lyon’s pentachaeta (Pentachaeta lyonii) had a moderate or high potential to occur within the project site. Therefore, a focused rare plant survey was conducted by ESA within and immediately adjacent to the project site, to determine presence/absence of these species and whether they may be impacted by proposed project activities. The results of the focused survey revealed that special-status plant species are not present onsite (absent) and would therefore not be affected by the proposed project activities (ESA 2021). The focused rare plant survey memorandum can be found in the Appendix C of this IS/MND.
TABLE 8
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED AND POTENTIALLY OCCURRING WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE Common and
Scientific Name Status Habitat Potential to Occur within Project Site Braunton’s milkvetch
(Astragalus
brauntonii)
FE,
CRPR
1B.1
Requires recent burns or disturbed
areas on limestone outcrops; usually
on sandstone with carbonate layers.
Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and
foothill grassland on hilltops, saddles,
or bowls between hills at elevations
of 3-640 meters amsl. Flowering
Time: March-July
Absent. Suitable vegetation communities are
present; however, the sandy substrate
preferred by the species does not occur within
the project site.
Focused surveys further verified that this
species is not present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
Catalina
mariposa-lily
(Calochortus
catalinae)
CRPR
4.2 Occurs in chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub, and valley
and foothill grassland communities
between 15 and 700 meters amsl.
Flowering Time: March-May
Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is
present throughout openings in the scrub
vegetation and non-native grass vegetation;
however, focused surveys revealed that this
species is not present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
Plummer’s
mariposa-lily
(Calochortus
plummerae)
CRPR
4.2,
LIS
Occurs on rocky and sandy sites,
usually of granitic or alluvial material.
Common after fire at elevations of
60-2,500 meters amsl. Found in
coastal scrub, chaparral, valley and
foothill grassland, cismontane
woodland, lower montane coniferous
forest. Flowering Time: May-July
Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is
present throughout openings in the scrub
vegetation and non-native grass vegetation;
however, focused surveys revealed that this
species is not present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
Club haired
mariposa-lily
(Calochortus
clavatus var.
clavatus)
CRPR
4.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill grassland, coastal
scrub. Generally, on serpentine clay,
rocky soils. <1300 m. Flowering
Time: May-June.
Absent. This species is generally associated
with serpentine and clay soils, which do not
appear to be prevalent onsite; however,
appropriate plant communities are present
throughout.
Focused surveys revealed that this species is
not present within or immediately adjacent to
the project site.
Slender mariposalily
(Calochortus
clavatus var.
gracilis)
CRPR
1B.2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill grassland, coastal
scrub. Generally, within shaded
canyons. < 1000 m. Flowering Time:
May-June.
Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is
present throughout openings in the scrub
vegetation and non-native grass vegetation;
however, focused surveys revealed that this
species is not present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 48 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Common and
Scientific Name Status Habitat Potential to Occur within Project Site Southern tarplant
(Centromadia
parryi ssp.
australis)
CRPR
1B.1
Often in disturbed sites near the
coast at marsh edges; also in
alkaline soils sometimes with
saltgrass. Sometimes on vernal pool
margins. 0-975 meters amsl.
Flowering Time: June-October
Absent. This species is generally found along
the margins of vernal pools and other wetland
habitats; however, are also known to occur in
disturbed, upland scrub and chaparral
communities.
Focused surveys revealed that this species is
not present within or immediately adjacent to
the project site.
Conejo dudleya
(Dudleya parva)
FT,
LIS,
CRPR
1B.2
Grows on clay or volcanic substrates
in coastal scrub and valley and
foothill grassland communities
between 60 and 450 meters amsl.
Flowering Time: May-July
Absent. Suitable outcrop formations
necessary to support this species are not
present within the project site.
Focused surveys further verified that this
species is not present within the project site.
Verity’s dudleya
(Dudleya verityi)
FT,
LIS,
CRPR
1B.1
Occurs on volcanic outcrops in
chaparral, cismontane woodland, and
coastal scrub communities between
60 and 120 meters amsl. Flowering
Time: May-June
Absent. Suitable outcrop formations
necessary to support this species are not
present within the project site.
Focused surveys revealed that this species is
not present within the project site.
Southern
California black
walnut
(Juglans
californica)
CRPR
4.2,
G3, S3
Occurs in chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and coastal scrub
communities between 50 and 900
meters amsl. Flowering Time: MarMay
Absent. This species is a perennial tree,
identifiable outside of its blooming period, and
was not observed within the project site during
the initial site visit.
Focused surveys further verified that this
species is not present within the project site.
White-veined
Monardella
(Monardella
hypoleuca ssp.
hypoleuca)
LIS,
CRPR
1B.3
Found on dry slopes in chaparral,
cismontane woodland communities
from 50-1,525 meters amsl.
Flowering Time: May-October
Absent. Suitable chaparral vegetation types
necessary to support this species are not
present within the project site.
Focused surveys further verified that this
species is not present within the project site.
Ojai navarretia
(Navarretia
ojaiensis)
CRPR
1B.1
Openings in chaparral, coastal scrub,
and valley and foothill grassland
communities between 275 and 620
meters amsl. Flowering Time: MayJuly
Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is
present throughout openings in the scrub
vegetation and non-native grass vegetation;
however, focused surveys revealed that this
species is not present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
Lyon’s
pentachaeta
(Pentachaeta
lyonii)
FE,
SE,
CRPR
1B.1
Rocky clay soils of volcanic origin
(Conejo volcanics) in openings within
chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley
and foothill grassland communities
between 30 and 630 meters. It does
not compete well with dense annual
grasses or shrubs, but occurs in areas
that consist mostly of bare ground.
Flowering Time: March-August
Absent. Appropriate vegetation is present
within the project site. Much of the substrate
onsite appears to consist of fill that supports
little of the Conejo volcanic substrate, preferred
by the species; however, the quantity may be
sufficient to support its presence.
Focused surveys revealed that this species is
not present within the project site.
Chaparral ragwort
(Senecio
aphanactis)
LIS,
CNPS
2B.2
Occurs within chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and coastal scrub habitats
at elevations from 20 and 855 meters
amsl. This species is sometimes
associated with alkaline soils.
Flowering Time: February-May
Absent. Appropriate vegetation is present
within the project site; however, alkaline soils,
commonly associated with the species, were
not observed.
Focused surveys further verified that this
species is not present within the project site.
Federal/State/Other Status:
FE – Federally Endangered, FSC – Federal Species of Concern; SE – State Endangered; California Native Plant Society (CNPS) 1B – Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere; 0.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) and 0.2 Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat).
SOURCE: ESA, 2020.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 49 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Aquatic Resources
A formal Aquatic Resources Delineation was not completed for the project; however, a preliminary investigation to identify such resources was completed during the site visit. No aquatic resources that display wetland characteristics (i.e., hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology), or drainage features such as an established bed and bank, depressed vegetation/debris, changes in substrate, etc. were observed within the project site.
However, an unnamed ephemeral drainage was observed immediately to the north of the project site, originating at Conejo Center Drive, and continuing to the northwest. This feature appears to connect to the Arroyo Conejo, downstream of the project site and ultimately the Pacific Ocean.
This feature would likely not be considered jurisdictional with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to a lack of intermittent or perennial flows; however, would likely be regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or the CDFW.
Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridors
Santa-Monica–Sierra Madre Connection
The Santa Monica – Sierra Madre Connection is an area associated with the South Coast Missing Linkages Project (SCMLP) deemed vital to wildlife movement between the coast/Santa Monica Mountains and the Santa Susana and Sierra Madre Ranges. The SCMLP is a joint effort between various entities including California State Parks, National Park Service, The Wildlands Conservancy, etc. This established migratory corridor is one of the few remaining coastal-inland connections remaining in coastal Southern California and is comprised of a rich mosaic of oak woodland, savanna, chaparral, coastal sage scrub, grasslands, and riparian forests and woodlands, and has several major strands to accommodate diverse reptile, bird, and mammal species, and ecosystem functions (Penrod et al. 2006).
The Santa Monica – Sierra Madre Connection extends into the south westernmost portion of the project.
Ventura County Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridors and The Critical Wildlife Passage Areas Overlay Zones
Ventura County Ordinances 4537 and 4539, Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridors (HCWC) and the Critical Wildlife Passage Areas (CWPA), were instated to “preserve the functional connectivity for wildlife and vegetation throughout the overlay zone, by minimizing direct and indirect barriers, minimizing loss of vegetation and habitat fragmentation and minimizing impacts to those areas that are narrow, impacted or otherwise tenuous with respect to wildlife movement.” The limits of the HCWC and CWPA were based on the findings presented in the SCLMP and mirror the boundaries of the Santa Monica-Sierra Madre Connection. As stated above, The Santa Monica-Sierra Madre Connection (HCWC/CWPA) extends into the south westernmost portion of the project (VCOC 2020).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 50 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 City of Thousand Oaks General Plan – Conservation Element The Conservation Element discusses the importance of wildlife movement corridors within the Planning Area, broadly described as those linkages that can be utilized by animals to gain access to critical foraging, nesting, and breeding habitats that are necessary to maintain healthy populations. This Section describes the most important corridors within the Planning Area as those linking the Santa Monica Mountains, Simi Hills, and Santa Susana Mountains.
The Santa Monica-Sierra Madre Connection (HCWC/CWPA overlay zones), extends slightly into the southwestern portion of the project. Additionally, wildlife was seen utilizing the immediate vicinity during the biological assessment and it is expected that the habitat onsite is used in a limited capacity for wildlife movement. However, the project site does not function as a “pinch point,” nor does it provide resources that are necessary for the survival of a particular species. In contrast, the COSCA land located to the north and west of the project site more closely represents the value of a HCWC/CWPA, as defined in Ventura County Ordinances 4537 and 4539; this open space area supports large swathes of undisturbed, contiguous habitat (i.e., coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and various riparian vegetation communities) that provide a largely unimpeded connection between Camarillo to the southwest and the Santa Rosa Valley to the north.
Furthermore, various unnamed canyons and associated drainages connect directly to the Arroyo Conejo, which is part of the Calleguas Creek Watershed and serves as an important corridor for various species of wildlife (i.e., amphibians, birds, fish, mammals), providing passage under U.S.
Route 101 in Camarillo, CA, to the Pacific Ocean.
Wildlife is much more likely to depend on this adjacent habitat (i.e., COSCA and unnamed drainage) than the project site, for local, largescale movement.
Critical Habitat
Under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), to the extent feasible, the USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are required to designate critical habitat for endangered and threatened species. Critical habitat is defined as areas of land, water, and air space containing the physical and biological features essential for the survival and recovery of endangered and threatened species. Designated critical habitat includes sites for breeding and rearing, movement or migration, feeding, roosting, cover, and shelter. Designated critical habitats require special management and protection of existing resources, including water quality and quantity, host animals and plants, food availability, pollinators, sunlight, and specific soil types.
Critical habitat designates this suitable habitat, occupied or not, as essential to the survival and recovery of the species.
No critical habitat is located within the project site (USFWS 2020a).
Protected Trees
Ordinance No. 1610-NS of the TOMC, protects any tree species within the oak (Quercus) genus including, but not limited to valley oak (Q. lobata), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia) and scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia) that measure 2 inches or greater in diameter when measured at 4.5 feet above the trees natural grade (dbh). Additionally, Ordinance No. 1217-NS as amended by Part 4, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 51 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Ordinance No.1610-NS of the TOMC protects larger-sized black walnut (8 inches dbh), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa; 12 inches dbh), toyon (8 inches dbh) and bay laurel (Umbellularia californica; 8 inches dbh), designated as Landmark trees. Larger specimens of the aforementioned species meet the criteria of landmark trees, and warrant protection during development if they are located on parcels greater than two acres and preclude those with singlefamily detached houses (TOMC 2020).
As identified in Ordinance No. 1610-NS, a permit is required to cut, remove, encroach within the protected zone (i.e., 5 feet from canopy or 15 feet from trunk, whichever is further), or relocate any oak or Landmark tree on public or private property within the City of Thousand Oaks (TOMC 2020).
No Oak or Landmark trees were observed within the project site during the site visit. One protected Coast Live Oak (1) is situated just outside the property line approximately 400 feet to the west of Conejo Center Drive.
Regulatory Setting
This subsection summarizes federal, state, and local regulations, permits, and policies pertaining to biological resources and wetlands considered for applicability to the proposed project.
Federal Endangered Species Act
USFWS, which has jurisdiction over plants, wildlife, and most freshwater fish, and NMFS, which has jurisdiction over anadromous fish, marine fish, and marine mammals, oversee implementation of FESA to ensure that federal agencies’ actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat for listed species. A federal agency is required to consult with USFWS and NMFS if it determines that its decision may affect a listed species under the agency’s jurisdiction. FESA prohibits the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered, including the destruction of habitat that could hinder species recovery.
FESA Section 9 take prohibition applies only to wildlife and fish species that are listed as threatened or endangered. Candidate species and species that are proposed for listing or are under petition for listing receive no protection under Section 9. Section 9 also prohibits the removal, possession, damage, or destruction of any endangered plant from federal land, as well as acts to remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy an endangered plant species in nonfederal areas in knowing violation of any state law or in the course of criminal trespass.
FESA Section 10 requires the issuance of an “incidental take” permit before any public or private action may be taken that would potentially harm, harass, injure, kill, capture, collect, or otherwise hurt (i.e., take) any individual of an endangered or threatened species. The permit requires preparation and implementation of a habitat conservation plan that would offset the take of individuals that may occur incidental to implementation of otherwise lawful activities, by providing for the overall preservation of the affected species through specific conservation measures.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 52 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Under FESA, the Secretary of the Interior (or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate) formally designates critical habitat for certain federally listed species and publishes these designations in the Federal Register. Critical habitat is not automatically designated for all federally listed species; thus, many do not have designated critical habitat.
Critical habitat is defined as the specific areas that are essential to the conservation of a federally listed species, and that may require special management consideration or protection. Critical habitat is determined using the best available scientific information about the physical and biological needs of the species. These needs, or primary constituent elements, include space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; food, water, light, air, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological needs; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, and rearing of offspring; and habitat that is protected from disturbance or is representative of the historical geographic and ecological distribution of a species.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC, §703, Supplement I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. An April 11, 2018, USFWS memorandum indicates that the MBTA’s prohibitions on take apply when the purpose of an action is to take migratory birds, their eggs, or their nests.
Therefore, take occurring as the result of an activity, the purpose of which is not to take birds, eggs, or nests, is not prohibited by the MBTA.
California Environmental Quality Act
The intent of CEQA is to maintain “high-quality ecological systems and the general welfare of the people of the State.” It is the policy of the State to “prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man’s activities, ensure that fish and wildlife populations do not drop below selfperpetuating levels, and preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities and examples of the major periods of California history.” CEQA forbids agencies from approving projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures can substantially reduce such impacts.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) indicates that impacts to state- and federally listed rare, threatened, or endangered plants or animals are significant if they significantly reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species. Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15380, impacts to other species (“special status species”) that meet certain criteria (i.e., it can be shown that the species’ survival in the wild is in jeopardy or it is at risk of becoming endangered in the near future) but are not officially listed also may be considered significant by the lead agency under CEQA, depending on the applicability of other laws (e.g., MBTA) and the discretion of the lead agency. For example, CDFW interprets Lists 1A, 1B, and 2 of the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California to consist of plants that, in a majority of cases, would qualify for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered. However, the determination of whether an impact is significant is a function of the lead agency, absent the Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 53 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 protection of other laws. Projects subject to CEQA review must specifically address potential impacts to listed species and provide mitigation measures if the impact is significant.
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15380 Although threatened and endangered species are protected by specific federal and state statutes, CEQA Guidelines Section 15380(b) provides that a species not included on the federal or state list of protected species may be considered rare or endangered if the species can be shown to meet certain specified criteria. These criteria have been modeled after the FESA definition and the FGC section that addresses rare or endangered plants or animals. This section was included in the CEQA Guidelines primarily to deal with situations in which a public agency is reviewing a project that may have a significant effect on, for example, a “candidate species” that has not yet been listed by either USFWS or CDFW. Thus, CEQA provides a CEQA lead agency with the ability to protect a species from a project’s potential impacts until the respective government agencies have an opportunity to designate the species as protected, if warranted.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Endangered Species Act
Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (FGC §2070 et seq.), CDFW has the responsibility for maintaining a list of threatened and endangered species. CDFW also maintains a list of “candidate species,” which are species formally noticed as being under review for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species. In addition, CDFW maintains lists of “species of special concern,” which serve as “watch lists.” Pursuant CESA requirements, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species could be present in the area affected by the project and determine whether the proposed project could have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may affect a candidate species.
California Native Plant Protection Act
State listing of plant species began in 1977 with the passage of the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), which directed CDFW (then California Department of Fish and Game) to carry out the legislature’s intent to “preserve, protect, and enhance endangered plants in this State.” The NPPA gave the California Fish and Game Commission the power to designate native plants as endangered or rare and to require permits for collecting, transporting, or selling such plants. CESA expanded upon the original NPPA and enhanced legal protection for plants. CESA established threatened and endangered species categories and grandfathered all rare animals—but not rare plants—into the act as threatened species. Thus, there are three listing categories for plants in California: rare, threatened, and endangered.
Nesting Birds
Under FGC Section 3503, it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto. In turn, Section 3503.3 prohibits take, possession, or destruction of any birds in the orders Falconiformes (hawks) or Strigiformes (owls), or of their nests and eggs.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 54 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Fully Protected Species
The FGC also allows the designation of a species as Fully Protected (see §3511 regarding birds, §4700 regarding mammals, §5050 regarding reptiles and amphibians, and §5515 regarding fish).
This designation provides a greater level of protection than is afforded by CESA, and until recently, fully protected species could not be taken at any time. On October 18, 2011, Senate Bill 618 was signed into law, which permits take of fully protected species where a Natural Communities Conservation Plan has been approved and is being implemented to ensure protection of those species.
Sensitive Natural Communities
“Sensitive” natural communities and habitats are defined by the CDFW as those natural communities that have a reduced range and/or are imperiled as a result of residential and commercial development, agriculture, energy production and mining, or an influx of invasive species. Natural communities are evaluated by the CDFW (CDFW 2020b) by utilizing NatureServe’s Heritage Methodology (NatureServe, 2020) which is based on the knowledge of range and distribution of a specific vegetation type and the proportion of occurrences that are of good ecological integrity. Evaluation is done at both Global (natural range within and outside of California [G]) and Subnational (State level for California [S]), each given a Conservation Rank from 1 (“critically imperiled” or very rare and threatened) to 5 (demonstrably secure). Natural communities and habitats with state ranks of S1-S3 are considered Sensitive Natural Communities and require review when evaluating environmental impacts (CDFW, 2020b).
Rivers, Streams and Lakes
Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Section 1600 et seq. of the FGC, CDFW regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake which supports fish or wildlife. A notification of a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement must be submitted to CDFW for “any activity that may substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake.” In addition, CDFW has authority under FGC over wetland and riparian habitats associated with lakes and streams. The CDFW reviews proposed actions, and if necessary, submits to the applicant a proposal that includes measures to protect affected fish and wildlife resources. The final proposal that is mutually agreed upon by CDFW and the applicant is the Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Clean Water Act Section 404 The USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have issued a set of guidance documents detailing the process for determining Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction over waters of the United States (waters of the U.S.) following the 2008 Rapanos decision. On April 21, 2020, the EPA finalized a revised definition of “waters of the United States under the CWA. The new rule streamlined the definition is as follows:
“The territorial seas and traditional navigable waters; perennial and intermittent tributaries that contribute surface water flow to such waters; certain lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters” (33 CFR 328.3[b]; 40 CFR 120.2[t]).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 55 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 The EPA and USACE issued a summary memorandum of the guidance for implementing the Supreme Court’s decision in Rapanos that addresses the jurisdiction over waters of the U.S. under the CWA. The complete set of guidance documents, summarized as key points below, were used to collect relevant data for evaluation by the EPA and the USACE to determine CWA jurisdiction over the project and to complete the “significant nexus test” as detailed in the guidelines.
The significant nexus test includes consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors. For circumstances such as those described in the Rapanos Guidance Key Points Summary below, the significant nexus test would take into account physical indicators of flow (evidence of an ordinary high water mark [OHWM]), if a hydrologic connection to a Traditionally Navigable Water (TNW) exists, and if the aquatic functions of the water body have a significant effect (more than speculative or insubstantial) on the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW. The USACE and EPA will apply the significant nexus standard to assess the flow characteristics and functions of a potential water of the U.S. to determine if it significantly affects the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the downstream TNW.
Wetlands (including swamps, bogs, seasonal wetlands, seeps, marshes, and similar areas) are also considered waters of the U.S. (subject to the significant nexus test), and are defined by USACE as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3[b]; 40 CFR 230.3[t]).
Indicators of three wetland parameters (i.e., hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetlands hydrology), as determined by field investigation, must be present for a site to be classified as a wetland by USACE (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Rapanos Guidance Key Points Summary
The USACE and USEPA will assert jurisdiction over the following waters:
x TNWs
x Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
x Non-navigable tributaries of TNWs that are intermittent or perennial x Wetlands that abut such tributaries
The USACE and USEPA will decide jurisdiction over the following waters based on whether they have a significant nexus with a TNW:
x Intermittent, non-navigable tributaries.
x Wetlands adjacent to non-navigable, intermittent, and perennial tributaries. x Wetlands adjacent to but that do not directly abut a non-navigable, intermittent and perennial tributary
The USACE and USEPA will not assert jurisdiction over the following waters:
x Ephemeral drainages, swales, or erosional features (gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow)
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 56 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 x Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water
Section 401 of the CWA gives the state authority to grant, deny, or waive certification of proposed federally licensed or permitted activities resulting in discharge to waters of the U.S. The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) directly regulates multi-regional projects and supports the Section 401 certification and wetlands program statewide. The RWQCB regulates activities pursuant to Section 401(a)(1) of the federal CWA, which specifies that certification from the State is required for any applicant requesting a federal license or permit to conduct any activity including but not limited to the construction or operation of facilities that may result in any discharge into navigable waters. The certification shall originate from the State or appropriate interstate water pollution control agency in/where the discharge originates or will originate. Any such discharge will comply with the applicable provisions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, and 307 of the CWA.
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
Most projects involving water bodies or drainages are regulated by the RWQCB, the principal State agency overseeing water quality of the State at the local/regional level. The survey area is located within the jurisdiction of the San Diego (R9) RWQCB. Where waters of the State overlap with waters of the U.S., pending verification from the USACE, those waters would be regulated under Section 401 of the CWA which is described in the Regulatory Framework in Section 3.1.
In the absence of waters of the U.S., waters may be regulated under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act if project activities, discharges, or proposed activities or discharges could affect California's surface, coastal, or ground waters. The permit submitted by the applicant and issued by RWQCB is either a Water Quality Certification in the presence of waters of the U.S. or a Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) in the absence of waters of the U.S.
The State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (Procedures), as prepared by the State Water Resources Control Board, was implemented on May 28, 2020. The Procedures include a definition for wetland waters of the state that include 1) all wetland waters of the U.S.; and 2) aquatic resources that meet both the soils and hydrology criteria for wetland waters of the U.S. but lack vegetation.
Local Plans and Policies
Thousand Oaks Tree Protection Ordinances (Ord. No. 16104-NS) Ordinance No. 937-NS, as amended by Ordinance No. 1534-NS and No. 1610-NS, of the TOMC, is intended “to preserve and protect oak trees in recognition of their historical, aesthetic, environmental and landmark value to the citizens of Thousand Oaks, present and future...” Protected trees include any species within the oak (Quercus) genus including, but not limited to valley oak (Q. lobata), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia) and scrub oak (Q. berberidifolia) that measure 2 inches or greater in dbh when measured at 4.5 feet above the trees natural grade.
Before any protected tree is trimmed, removed, or encroached upon, property owners must contact the Community Development Department to ensure these activities are conducted in Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 57 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 compliance with the tree protection ordinance and obtain a permit for tree modification or removal when applicable (TOMC 2020).
Ordinance No. 1217-NS as amended by Ordinance No.1610-NS of the TOMC protects largersized black walnut (8 inches dbh), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa; 12 inches dbh), toyon (8 inches dbh) and bay laurel (Umbellularia californica; 8 inches dbh), designated as Landmark trees. Larger specimens of the aforementioned species meet the criteria of landmark trees, and warrant protection during development; this excludes those present within properties with single-family detached dwellings, provided they are less than 2 acres in size (TOMC 2020).
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation.
Special-Status Plant Species
No special-status plants listed as endangered, threatened, candidate, or state rare pursuant to the federal or state Endangered Species Acts, or as rare by the CNPS, were observed during the initial site visit or focused rare plant survey; therefore, special-status plants have been determined not to be present within or immediately adjacent to the project site.
Construction
Special-Status Avian Wildlife Species and Nesting Birds The loggerhead shrike and dozens of other resident and migratory bird species protected in accordance with the MBTA and Sections 3505, 3503.5, and 3511 of the California Fish and Game Code, may nest within and adjacent to the project site. Additionally, the coastal Cactus wren, coastal California gnatcatcher and white-tailed kite may nest outside of the project site, within 500 feet of ground disturbance. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 requires preconstruction bird surveys and the implementation of avoidance buffers if nests are detected; therefore, with the implementation of mitigation, the potential for the proposed project to impact nesting birds and other special-status avian species will be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Operation
Nighttime lighting associated with the completed project may disrupt foraging and breeding avian species and nesting birds. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce the potential for nighttime lighting associated with project operation to impact special-status avian species and nesting birds to a less-than-significant level.
Construction
Special-Status Mammal and reptile Species
The coast horned lizard, coastal whiptail and San Diego desert woodrat may occur on or within 500 feet of the project site and may affected by construction activities. Mitigation Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 58 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Measure BIO-3a through BIO-3c would ensure that construction impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3a would require a pre-construction survey for coast horned, coastal whiptail and San Diego desert woodrat and the relocation of individuals detected within proposed work areas. Mitigation Measure BIO-3b would require that active coast horned lizard and coastal whiptail nests are left in place until they can be verified as inactive.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3c would require that active San Diego desert woodrat middens be relocated outside of the limits of construction limits to avoid impact to this species.
Operation
Nighttime lighting associated with the completed project may disrupt foraging and breeding special-status wildlife adjacent to the project site. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce the potential effects of nighttime lighting to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
BIO-1: If work activities occur within the bird nesting season (generally defined as February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within 3-7 days prior to the proposed construction start date, to identify any active nests within 500 feet of the project site. If an active nest is found, the nest shall be avoided and a suitable buffer zone shall be delineated in the field such that no impacts shall occur until the chicks have fledged the nest as determined by a qualified biologist.
Construction buffers shall be 300 feet for passerines and up to 500 feet for the coastal Cactus wren, coastal California gnatcatcher, white-tailed kite, and raptor species; however, avoidance buffers may be reduced at the discretion of the biologist, depending on the location of the nest and species tolerance to human presence and constructionrelated noises and vibrations.
BIO-2: To minimize potential indirect impact to special-status wildlife species, nighttime lighting shall be shielded downward to limit spillage onto adjacent habitats.
BIO-3a: Prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction clearance survey throughout portions of the project impact area (i.e., in areas of proposed ground disturbance), including a 500-foot buffer for coasthorned lizard, coastal western whiptail and San Diego desert woodrat. If any of these species are observed within or near the project site during preconstruction clearance surveys, a qualified biologist shall relocate the individual(s) to suitable habitat outside of the project site to ensure that construction-related impacts are avoided.
BIO-3b: If an active nest of coast-horned lizard or coastal western whiptail is inadvertently excavated during construction activities, it shall be carefully replaced, to the extent feasible, and left undisturbed until the eggs have hatched and young have matured enough for the biologist to deem the nest inactive.
BIO-3c: If an active woodrat midden is observed within or immediately adjacent to areas proposed for ground disturbance, it shall be dismantled by hand under the supervision of a qualified biologist prior to the commencement of project activities. If young are Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 59 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 encountered during the dismantling process, the material shall be returned in place and the midden remain unmolested for two to three weeks in order to give the young enough time to mature and disperse on their own accord. Material shall be moved to suitable adjacent areas (i.e., native scrub habitat at least 500 feet away) that would not be directly impacted by the proposed project.
b) No Impact. The project site does not support riparian vegetation and/or sensitive natural communities identified in regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c) Less-than-Significant Impact. An Aquatic Resources Delineation report was not conducted for the project; however, an unnamed ephemeral drainage was observed during the site visit, immediately adjacent to the project site. The unnamed drainage originates at Conejo Center Drive, immediately north of the project site, and provides connectivity to Arroyo Conejo, downstream and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. This feature would not be considered jurisdictional with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to a lack of intermittent or perennial flows; however, would likely be regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or the CDFW. The feature is not anticipated to be impacted as part of the project; however, if the feature is impacted then the applicant would be required to enter into permit agreements with the USACE (CWA Section 404 Permit), CDFW (Section 1602, Streambed Alteration Agreement) and RWCQB (CWA Section 401 permit) to ensure that impacts to aquatic resources are avoided and/or mitigated as deemed appropriate. By complying with the terms of those permits, project impacts would be reduced to less than significant. d) Less-than-Significant Impact. Wildlife is expected to utilize the available habitat onsite in a limited capacity for foraging, breeding and movement. However, the project site does not function as a “pinch point,” nor does it provide resources that are necessary for the survival of a particular species. Impacts would be less than significant. e) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation.
Construction
Thousand Oaks Tree Protection Ordinance (Ord. No. 1610-NS) Protected Trees
No Oak or Landmark trees were observed within the project site during the site visit. One protected Coast Live Oak (1) is situated just outside the property line approximately 400 feet to the west of Conejo Center Drive. The removal or damage to the dripline of the Coast Live Oak would result in a significant impact. If during construction the Coast Live Oak is impacted, then the applicant would be required to comply with the Thousand Oaks Tree Protection Ordinance (Ord. No. 1610-NS). Compliance with the tree protection ordinance would ensure that impacts to protected oak trees are reduced to a less-thansignificant level.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 60 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Thousand Oaks General Plan
Community Forest/Forestry Element
TOGP Policy F-13 - The City's legacy of trees shall be preserved through the rigorous enforcement of its Oak and Landmark Tree Ordinances. City staff shall keep current with research and practices relating to oak tree preservation and should disseminate such information to maintenance personnel, property owners and others responsible for the City's oak and landmark trees
Compliance with the Thousand Oaks Tree Protection Ordinance (Ord. No. 1610-NS) would ensure that the project minimizes impacts to protected oak and landmark trees, to the extent feasible, and remains in compliance with TOGP Policy F-13 to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant-level.
Conservation Element
Streams and Creeks
TOGP Policy CO-10 – Streams and creeks should be protected as open space and maintained in as natural a state as possible, and appropriate measures taken to manage urban runoff, in order to protect the City’s and other downstream communities’ water quality, wildlife diversity, native vegetation, and aesthetic value. This will contribute to the regional effort to improve the quality of Calleguas Creek.
TOGP Policy CO-23 - Critical wildlife habitat resources such as movement corridors, surface water impoundments, streams and springs should be given special consideration for protection, restoration or enhancement, in order to maintain biodiversity, biological productivity and ecological integrity of natural open space areas.
The completion of an Aquatic Resources Delineation and acquisition of the applicable permits will ensure that the project remains in compliance with Policies CO-10 and CO-23.
Native Plant and Wildlife Resources
TOGP Policy CO-21 - The City shall encourage the proper management, conservation and protection of native plant communities throughout the City's Planning Area, including developed areas and undeveloped open space lands.
Disturbed California buckwheat scrub, disturbed coastal sage scrub and disturbed coastal sage scrub-California buckwheat scrub, totaling up to 17.49 acres, will be removed as a result of construction activities. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4 will ensure compliance with Policy CO-21 by enhancing 17.49 acres of native scrub habitat located within the adjacent COSCA land.
TOGP Policy CO-25 - The City should foster a holistic approach to conservation of wildlife resources including consideration of biological crusts and pollinator species in recognition of the many important functions they perform in a healthy ecosystem.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 61 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO 3a-3c will ensure that pre-construction surveys for special-status wildlife are completed, and if detected, measures would be implemented to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Oak and Landmark Trees
TOGP Policy CO-29 – Continue to protect oak and landmark trees and their habitat in recognition of their historic, aesthetic and environmental value to the citizens of Thousand Oaks, in particular Valley Oak habitat.
Compliance with the Thousand Oaks Tree Protection Ordinance (Ord. No. 1610-NS) will ensure that impacts to protected oak and landmark trees are reduced to a less-thansignificant level.
Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species
TOGP Policy CO-32 – The 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 County of Ventura and the City of Thousand Oaks
Mitigation Measure BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO 3a-3c will ensure that pre-construction surveys for special-status wildlife are completed. If detected within the project site, measures will be implemented to reduce impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species to a less-than-significant level.
Open Space Element
Unit Area 3, Conejo Canyons is located to the north and west of the project site. Numerous policies have been adopted to aid in the preservation of areas designated as open space in the TOGP. The proposed project is not expected to extend into the Unit Area 3; therefore, project would remain in compliance with all policies set forth within the TOGP.
Operation
Native Plant and Wildlife Resources
TOGP Policy CO-21 - The City shall encourage the proper management, conservation and protection of native plant communities throughout the City's Planning Area, including developed areas and undeveloped open space lands.
TOGP Policy CO-25 - The City should foster a holistic approach to conservation of wildlife resources including consideration of biological crusts and pollinator species in recognition of the many important functions they perform in a healthy ecosystem.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 will ensure that impacts to biological crusts/pollinator species (CO-25) and the native plant communities (CO-21) in which they occur, as a result of lighting associated with the completed project, would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 62 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Wildlife Movement Corridors
TOGP Policy CO-28 – Urban land uses adjoining natural open space areas should be designed in a manner that is sensitive to the needs of wildlife and avoids or minimizes any potentially adverse impacts to movement corridors.
Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species
TOGP Policy CO-32 – The 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 County of Ventura and the City of Thousand Oaks
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 will ensure that impacts to biological resources described in the policies above (CO-28 and 32), as a result of lighting associated with the completed project, would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
BIO-4: Enhance 17.49 acres of native scrub vegetation located within adjacent COSCA land, at a ratio of 1:1. The proposed enhancement shall include, at a minimum, the treatment of non-native and/or invasive (Cal-IPC moderate or high rating) present within existing native scrub vegetation. The proposed methods and extent of the proposed enhancement activities shall be approved by the City of Thousand Oaks. f) No Impact. The project site is located in an adopted Specific Planning area and is not located within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No impact would occur.
Cumulative Impacts
The five cumulative projects described in Table 2 are located within previously developed lots and are not expected to contain sensitive biological resources, but there is the potential to support nesting by birds protected by State and federal regulation. Impacts to nesting birds for the proposed project and the related projects would be below the level of significance with the compliance with regulations protecting nesting birds. In addition, it is also anticipated that the other related projects would implement similar mitigation measures on a case-by-case basis as determined by project-specific environmental review to reduce individual project impacts, if any.
Impacts during construction and operation at the cumulative project locations are expected to be less than significant as the projects are located on previously developed lots which are lacking native vegetation. Therefore, cumulative impacts to biological resources as a result of implementation of the proposed project would not be expected to be significant with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 through BIO-4.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 63 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 References
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Todd Keeler-Wolf and Julie Evens. 2006.
Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties, California. Version 1—Association Level and Specific Alliances. January 2006.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations. March 20, 2018.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2019. Evaluation of the Petition from the Xerces Society, Defenders of Wildlife, and the Center for Food Safety, To List Four Species of Bumble Bees as Endangered Under the California Endangered Species Act.
City of Thousand Oaks (TOMC). 2020. Thousand Oaks Municipal Code. https://www.toaks.org/departments/city-clerk/municipal-code Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways Experimental Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Environmental Science Associates (ESA). 2021. Focused Rare Plant Survey for the Conejo Summit Project. July 21, 2021.
Holland, Robert F., California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Non-game Heritage Program. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
Penrod, K.C. Cabanero, P. Beier, C. Luke, W. Spencer, E. Rubin, R. Sauajot, S. Riley, and D.
Kamradt. 2006. South Coast Missing Linkages Project: A Linkage Design for the Santa Monica-Sierra Madre Connection. Produced by South Coast Wildlands, Idyllwild, CA. www.scwildlands.org, in cooperation with National Park Service, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, California State Parks, and the Nature Conservancy.
Solek, C. and L. Szijj. 2004. Cactus Wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus). In The Coastal Scrub and Chaparral Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for protecting and managing coastal scrub and chaparral habitats and associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight. http://www.prbo.org/calpif/htmldocs/scrub.html U.S. Department of State Geographer (USDSG). 2020. Google Earth Pro.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. September 29, 2010.
Ventura County Ordinance Code (VCOC). 2020. Ventura County Ordinance Code. https://vcrma.org/county-ordinances
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 64 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Cultural Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
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 pursuant to
§15064.5?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
The following discussion is based on Conejo Summit Project – Final Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report (Vader and Gonzalez, 2020). The Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report is confidential and is not for public distribution due to the sensitive nature of the resources discussed. The assessment included a records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) housed at California State University, Fullerton; a California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File search; review of historic topographic maps and aerial photographs; a desktop geoarchaeological review; and a cultural resources survey. a) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. One prehistoric archaeological resource (P-56-000449) consisting of a village site was identified in the project area as a result of the cultural resources survey report. The site was subject to a testing program in 1978 and, as a result, the site was found to contain intact subsurface archaeological deposits.
Based on the results of the 1978 testing program, it was recommended that the site either be preserved, or subject to data recovery excavations to salvage relevant data prior to its destruction to mitigate potential impacts associated with development. Although the site does not appear to have been formally evaluated for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), based on the previous recommendations and on a review of the site’s constituents, the site appears eligible under CRHR Criterion 4 (data potential) and, therefore, qualifies as a historical resource pursuant to CEQA. The site is located within an undisturbed portion of the project area within a fenced perimeter atop the remnant of a ridgeline. No additional cultural resources were identified within or immediately adjacent to the project, and previous mass grading of the Project area in the mid-1990s reduces the possibility for encountering intact subsurface archaeological deposits during project-related ground disturbance.
The project’s current design does not propose any development or other disturbances to P-56-000449, and, therefore, the site would not be subject to direct impacts. Although no direct impacts are anticipated, the site could be subject to indirect impacts during and after project construction as a result of increased use of the site’s vicinity. Indirect impacts may include increased foot traffic through the site as well as looting. As such, the project could impact the significance of an archaeological site that qualifies as a historical Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 65 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 resource pursuant to CEQA. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through - 5 would reduce potential impacts to an archaeological resource qualifying as historical resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-1: Prior to project approval, a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology (U.S.
Department of the Interior, 2008) shall be retained by the Applicant to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources.
CUL-2: Within 30 days of final project approval of entitlements or deed restrictions 30 days before pulling of the first grading permit, consistent with City of Thousand Oaks’ General Plan, Conservation Element (2013) CO-35, resource P-56-000449 shall be protected by deed restriction as permanent "open space", in order to prevent any future development or use that might otherwise adversely impact the resource. The deed restriction shall contain stipulations to ensure the protection and maintenance of P-56- 000449 in perpetuity. The deed restriction shall outline the types of protective measure to be implemented (e.g., fencing, capping). The agreement shall also include provisions for the preparation of an archaeological site maintenance plan that outlines roles and responsibilities, types of maintenance that are allowed and disallowed, as well as a maintenance schedule to ensure the site’s protective measures are maintained. The qualified archaeologist shall review and comment on the agreement and maintenance plan. If significant new information related to the presence of the resources emerges then the revaluation of the deed restriction shall occur.
CUL-3: An annual site condition verification program shall be undertaken to document the condition of P-56-000449. The site verification program shall be implemented by the qualified archaeologist, shall occur once every month during project grading and construction of Building 1G and Building 2, and on an annual basis for the first three years after the completion of project construction.
The goal of the annual site condition verification program is to monitor whether P-56- 000449 is being indirectly impacting as a result of an increased use of the surrounding area. The results of the annual site condition verification shall be documented in a brief memorandum and shall include: confirmation of resource boundaries with sub-meter GPS; general condition and disturbances observed; and photography to document whether any change in resource condition has occurred. California Department of Parks and Recreations (DPR) 523 form updates, following California Office of Historic Preservation’s (OHP) Instructions for Recording Historical Resources, shall be prepared and filed with the South Central Coastal Information Center for P-56-000449 if changes in setting or condition are observed.
If no impacts to P-56-000449 are observed following the first three years, the annual site condition verification program may be discontinued. If the annual site condition verification program identifies impacts to P-56-000449 resulting from project operations, or if, at any time, the City becomes aware of such impacts, additional protective measures shall be implemented immediately as recommended by the qualified archaeologist. If protective measures are implemented, annual verification of the measures’ success shall be conducted for a period of three years.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 66 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 CUL-4: Prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities associated with the project, the qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. Construction personnel shall also be instructed to avoid P-56-000449. The Applicant shall ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance.
CUL-5: In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials during project implementation, all work shall immediately cease in the area (within approximately 100 feet) of the discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist. Construction shall not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with the City on the significance of the resource.
If it is determined that the discovered archaeological resource constitutes a significant resource, avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation.
Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. In the event that preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and implemented by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City that provides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the archaeological resource b) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The only one known archaeological resource, P-56-000449, was identified within the project area as a result of the cultural resources survey report prepared for the project. Resource P-56-000449 qualifies as a historical resource, and, therefore, cannot qualify as a unique archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA. No additional archaeological resources were identified within or immediately adjacent to the project. Previous mass grading of the project area in the mid1990s likely removed native soils that would have had the potential to contain intact archaeological deposits. As such, the likelihood for encountering intact archaeological deposits that qualify as unique archaeological resources during project implementation is low. Nonetheless, should project-related ground disturbing activities encounter subsurface archaeological deposits that qualify as unique archaeological resources, the project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-4, and CUL-5 will reduce potential impacts to unknown archaeological deposits that could qualify as unique archaeological resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
Implement Mitigation Measure CUL-1, CUL-4 and CUL-5
c) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. No known formal or informal cemeteries or other burial places are known to exist within the project area and the project is unlikely to disturb human remains. However, because the project would involve earthmoving activities, there is the possibility, albeit low, that such actions could unearth, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 67 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 expose, or disturb previously unknown human remains. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-6, which requires compliance with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.98, potential impacts to human remains would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-6: If human remains are encountered, the contractor shall halt work in the vicinity (within 100 feet) of the find and contact the Ventura County Coroner in accordance with Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, subdivision (c), and PRC Section 5097.98 (as amended by AB 2641). The NAHC shall designate a most likely descendant (MLD) for the remains per PRC Section 5097.98. The contractor shall ensure that the immediate vicinity where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the MLD regarding their recommendations, as prescribed in PRC Section 5097.98, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains Cumulative Impacts
As discussed above, Cultural Resources, ground-disturbing activities associated with construction may uncover cultural resources in the proposed project areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-6 would reduce the proposed project impacts to a less than significant level. It is also anticipated that the other related projects would implement similar mitigation measures on a case-by-case basis as determined by project-specific environmental review. The incremental effect on cumulative cultural resources during construction and operation of the proposed project would be less than significant. Therefore, the contribution is not cumulatively considerable and would not result in a cumulative impact on cultural resources.
References
Vader, Michael and Mathew Gonzalez. 2020. Conejo Summit Project – Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report. Prepared for the City of Thousand Oaks by Environmental Science Associates.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 68 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Energy
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VI. ENERGY — Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact.
Construction
Construction of the project would result in energy consumption from the use of heavyduty construction equipment, on-road trucks, and construction workers commuting to and from the project Site. Electricity would be used during construction to provide temporary power for lighting and electronic equipment (e.g., computers) and to power certain construction equipment (e.g., hand tools or other electric equipment). Energy use during construction would generally not result in a substantial increase in on-site electricity consumption. Electricity use during construction would be variable depending on lighting needs and the use of electric-powered equipment and would be temporary for the duration of construction activities. It is expected that construction electricity use would be temporary and negligible over the long-term. Natural gas is not anticipated to be used during construction activities.
Heavy-duty construction equipment would be primarily diesel-fueled. The assumption that diesel fuel would be used for most equipment represents the most conservative scenario for maximum potential energy use during construction. The estimated total diesel fuel that would be consumed by heavy-duty construction equipment approximately 622,148 gallons over the entire construction period. This results in annual consumption over an 84-month project of 92,170 gallons. Calculation details are provided in Appendix D of this document. Based on CARB’s on-road vehicle emissions model, EMFAC2017, heavy-duty haul trucks and vendor trucks operating in the South Coast Air Basin would have an estimated average fuel economy of approximately 6.6 and 8.1 miles per gallon respectively in 2021. Although construction would occur over 84 months, 2021 fuel economy values were used to provide a conservative assessment as fuel economies would increase in future years.
The number of construction workers that would be required would vary based on the phase of construction and activity taking place. The transportation fuel required by construction workers to travel to and from the project Site would depend on the total number of worker trips estimated for the duration of construction activity. The total Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 69 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 gasoline fuel was estimated for workers and is 36,617 gallons over the total construction period or an annual average of 5,425 gallons per year.
For comparison purposes only, and not for the purpose of determining significance, the annual average fuel usage would represent approximately 0.002 percent of the 2019 annual on-road gasoline-related energy consumption and 0.28 percent of the 2019 annual diesel fuel-related energy consumption in Ventura County (CEC 2019), as shown in Appendix D of this Draft EIR.
Transportation fuels (gasoline and diesel) are produced from crude oil, which can be domestic or imported from various regions around the world. Based on current proven reserves, crude oil production would be sufficient to meet over 50 years of worldwide consumption (BP Global, 2021). Vehicles that would be used by construction workers would comply with Corporate Average Fuel Economy fuel economy standards, which would result in more efficient use of transportation fuels (lower consumption). Vehicles that would be used by construction workers would also comply with Pavley and Low Carbon Fuel Standards which are designed to reduce vehicle GHG emissions, but would also result in fuel savings in addition to compliance with Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards.7
Construction of the project would utilize fuel-efficient equipment consistent with State and federal regulations, such as fuel efficiency regulations in accordance with the CARB Pavley Phase II standards, the anti-idling regulation in accordance with Section 2485 in Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, and fuel requirements in accordance with Section 93115 in Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, and would comply with State measures to reduce the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy, such as petroleum-based transportation fuels. While these regulations are intended to reduce construction emissions, compliance with the anti-idling and emissions regulations discussed above would also result in fuel savings from the use of more fuelefficient engines.
Operation
Operational energy consumption would occur as a result of the building’s energy needs and the use of transportation fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) associated with vehicles traveling to and from the project Site. This analysis estimates the maximum operational energy consumption to evaluate the project’s associated impacts on energy resources.
Daily operation of the project would consume energy in the form of electricity. Based on the type of land use (light industrial) natural gas is not anticipated to be consumed.
Additionally, energy would be consumed off-site for the conveyance and treatment of 7 In September 2019, the USEPA published the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule in the federal register (Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 188, Friday, September 27, 2019, Rules and Regulations, 51310- 51363) that maintains the vehicle miles per gallon standards applicable in model year 2020 for model years 2021 through 2026. California and 23 other states and environmental groups in November 2019 in U.S. District Court in Washington, filed a petition for the EPA to reconsider the published rule. The Court has not yet ruled on these lawsuits.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 70 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 water, wastewater, and the disposal of solid waste. Building energy use factors and water demand factors from CalEEMod, consistent with the project analyses conducted for air quality and greenhouse emissions, are used to estimate building energy use. The project’s estimated net operational energy demand is provided in Table 9. The project would install solar electric PV systems, as required to meet local applicable Codes. The project would be designed to meet the applicable standards of the Green Building Code requirements such as, energy-efficient appliances, water efficient plumbing fixtures and fittings, and water-efficient landscaping. These energy saving features are included in the electricity estimates in Table 9.
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL NET NEW ENERGY USE DURING PROJECT OPERATION Energy Typea,b Annual Quantity
Electricity
Project 6.89 GWh
Percent County Use 0.13%
Natural Gas (From Transportation)
Project 329 MMBtu
Percent County Use 0.002%
Transportation
Project
Gasoline 29,402 gallons
Diesel 168,760 gallons
Percent County Use
Gasoline 0.01%
Diesel 0.51%
GWh = Gigawatt-hours
MMBtu = million British thermal units
a Detailed calculations are provided in Appendix D.
b Project electricity and natural gas estimates assume compliance with applicable 2019 Title 24 and CALGreen Code requirements.
SOURCE: ESA, 2021.
Electricity
As shown in Table 9, with compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards and applicable CALGreen requirements, buildout of the project would result in a projected net increase in the on-site demand for electricity totaling approximately 6.89 GWh per year. The project would include building features such as energy-efficient appliances, water efficient plumbing fixtures and fittings, and water-efficient landscaping. All components would, at a minimum, meet the City’s Green Building Program requirements.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 71 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 SCE is required to procure at least 33 percent of its energy portfolio from renewable sources by 2020. With the passage of SB 100 in September 2018, SCE will be required to update its long-term plans to demonstrate compliance including providing 60 percent of its energy portfolio from renewable sources by December 31, 2030, and ultimately planning for 100 percent eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SCE’s current sources include wind, solar, eligible hydroelectric, biomass/biowaste, and geothermal sources. These sources accounted for 35 percent of SCE’s overall energy mix in 2019, the most recent year for which data are available (SCE 2019a).
Based on SCE’s 2019 Annual Report, SCE total system sales for 2018-2019 fiscal year (the latest data available) was 84,654,000 MWh of electricity (SCE 2019b). As such, the project-related net increase in annual electricity consumption of 6.89 GWh per year would represent less than 0.001 percent of SCE’s total energy sales. In addition, as previously described, the proposed project would incorporate a variety of energy conservation measures to reduce energy usage. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of electricity.
Natural Gas
With compliance with 2019 Title 24 standards and applicable CALGreen Code requirements, buildout of the project is projected to generate a net increase in the transportation demand for natural gas totaling approximately 3.29 MMBtu per year.
Based on the 2020 California Gas Report, the California Energy and Electric Utilities, a collective of California utility companies, estimates natural gas supplies within SoCalGas’ planning area would be approximately 1,300,164,675 MMBtu in 2027 (CGEU 2020). The proposed project would account for less than 0.001 percent of the 2027 forecasted consumption in SoCalGas’ planning area.
As previously described, the proposed project incorporates a variety of energy conservation measures and features to reduce energy usage and minimize energy demand.
Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of natural gas.
Transportation Energy
During operation, project-related traffic would result in the consumption of petroleumbased fuels related to vehicular travel to and from the project site. As summarized in Table 9, the proposed project’s estimated net increase in petroleum-based fuel usage would be approximately 29,402 gallons of gasoline and 168,760 gallons of diesel per year.
Based on the CEC’s California Annual Retail Fuel Outlet Report, Ventura County consumed approximately 13,473,000,000 gallons of gasoline and approximately 1,559,000,000 gallons of diesel fuel in 2019 (CEC 2020). The proposed project would account for 0.01 percent of County gasoline consumption and 0.51 percent of County diesel consumption (based on the available County fuel sales data for the year 2019).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 72 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Additionally, in accordance with the CALGreen Code, infrastructure for EV charging stations would be provided to meet local applicable Codes. The project would provide a total of 51 charging stations (Iteris 2020).
The project would support Statewide efforts to improve transportation energy efficiency and reduce transportation energy consumption with respect to private automobiles for the reasons provided below. As detailed in the transportation analysis for the project, VMT reductions would be achieved through providing a pedestrian network, providing bike parking and end of trip facilities, providing electrical vehicle charging stations, ride share parking program, and a connection to the Hill Canyon Road Bicycle Trail (Iteris 2020).
As a result, operation of the project would provide employees, and visitors with alternative transportation options. As with the project, other future development projects would be expected to reduce VMT by encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation and other design features that promote VMT reductions consistent with applicable provision of the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS for the land use type.
Furthermore, the project would be consistent with the energy efficiency policies emphasized by the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. The project would not conflict with the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS goals and benefits intended to improve mobility and access to diverse destinations, provide better “placemaking,” provide more transportation choices, and reduce vehicular demand and associated emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the energy reduction-related actions and strategies contained in the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS.
As the above discussion demonstrates, the project would minimize operational transportation fuel demand consistent with and not in conflict with State, regional, and City goals. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy, and impacts would be less than significant
b) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would incorporate green building design features such as solar electric PV systems and electric vehicle charging parking spaces, consistent with the energy efficiency standards in the CALGreen Code.
The project would not conflict with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals and benefits intended to improve mobility and access to diverse destinations, provide better “placemaking,” provide more transportation choices, and reduce vehicular demand and associated emissions. The proposed project would provide a pedestrian-friendly design, as well as provide bicycle storage areas for project employees, and visitors. Further, the proposed project would install EV charging spaces.
As detailed in the transportation analysis for the project, VMT reductions would be achieved through providing a pedestrian network, providing bike parking and end of trip facilities, providing electrical vehicle charging stations, ride share parking program, and a connection to the Hill Canyon Road Bicycle Trail (Iteris 2020).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 73 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 As a result, the proposed project would support Statewide efforts to improve transportation energy efficiency and reduce wasteful or inefficient transportation energy consumption with respect to private automobiles. Overall, the project’s features would support and promote the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency, therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Cumulative Impacts
Like the project, other cumulative developments would be required to incorporate energy conservation features in order to comply with applicable mandatory regulations including CALGreen Code, state energy standards under Title 24, and incorporate mitigation measures, as necessary. As such, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy would not be cumulatively considerable. Further, as previously described, the proposed project incorporates a variety of energy conservation measures and features to reduce energy usage and minimize energy demand. Related projects, as with the project, would be required to evaluate natural gas conservation features and compliance with applicable regulations including the Title 24 standards and CALGreen Code, and incorporate mitigation measures, as necessary under CEQA. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of natural gas.
References
BP Global, Oil reserves, 2021, http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energyeconomics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil/oil-reserves.html, accessed January 2021.
California Gas and Electric Utilities (CGEU), 2020 California Gas Report, page 146.
CEC, California Retail Fuel Outlet Annual Reporting (CEC-A15) Results, 2019 https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy/californiaretail-fuel-outlet-annual-reporting, accessed January 2021.
Iteris 2020. Draft Shapell Industrial Project –CEQA Transportation Analysis. December 21.
Kimley Horn 2020. Shapell Traffic Study. May 15.
SCE 2019a, Power 2019 Power Content Label, Southern California Edison.
Edison International and SCE 2019. 2019 Annual Report, page 2.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 74 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Geology and Soils
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆ ?Landslides) iv
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ܆ ܆ ܈ ܆ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become 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 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
Descriptions and analysis for this section are based on information contained in the Geotechnical Site Evaluation Update Commercial Development of Tract 4823, Phase 1 and 3 Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard in the Newbury Park area of Thousand Oaks, California prepared by Gorian & Associates, Inc. (Gorian 2019), which is included in Appendix E a.i–ii) Less-than-Significant Impact. The faults most susceptible to earthquake rupture are active faults, which have experienced surface displacement within the last 11,000 years.
The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no mapped active faults are known to pass through the immediate project region (Gorian 2019). Therefore, the potential for fault rupture to affect the proposed project would be considered less than significant.
The project area is located in a seismically active region and is subject to strong ground shaking. The principal potential earthquake hazard for the project area is ground shaking, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 75 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 which could cause damage to buildings and infrastructure. However, the proposed project would be required to meet the California Building Code (CBC) requirements for constructing structures in seismically active regions. Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant.
a.iii–iv) Less-than-Significant Impact. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where unconsolidated and/or near saturated soils lose cohesion and are converted to a fluid state as a result of severe vibratory motion. The relatively rapid loss of soil during strong earthquake shaking results in the temporary fluid-like behavior of the soil. The proposed development is not within an area shown to have a potential for liquefaction or landsliding on the State’s Seismic Hazard Zones Map. The alluvium and engineered fill underlying the site are not considered susceptible to liquefaction or seismic induced settlement. Geomorphic features typical of significant landslides were not identified on or directly off-site the site (Gorian 2019). Impacts would be less than significant. b) Less-than-Significant Impact. The upper soils in the project area have become weathered and disturbed. Therefore, within all areas of construction or grading soil removals would extend to the previously placed engineered fill or native soils. The grading is anticipated to removal approximately 18 inches from the present grade. Soil exposed by construction activities could be subject to erosion if exposed to heavy rain, winds, or other storm events. However, the proposed project would require a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as the proposed project would disturb at least one acre of soil. A project specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be prepared in compliance with the Construction General Permit. The SWPPP would identify erosion control and sediment control best management practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to minimize the occurrence of soil erosion or loss of topsoil. With implementation of the required SWPPP and BMPs, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed above, the proposed development is not within an area shown to have a potential for liquefaction or landslides on the State’s Seismic Hazard Zones Map. The alluvium and engineered fill underlying the site are not considered susceptible to liquefaction or seismic induced settlement and the geomorphic features typical of significant landslides were not identified on or directly off-site the site (Gorian 2019). Additionally, the proposed project would execute all recommendation provided in the Geotechnical Report prepared for the project to ensure safety and reduce risk related to geologic hazards. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Less-than-Significant Impact. Expansive soils are predominantly comprised of clays, which expand in volume when water is absorbed and shrink when the soil dries.
Expansion is measured by shrink-swell potential, which is the volume change in soil with a gain in moisture. Soils with a moderate to high shrink-swell potential can cause damage to roads, buildings, and infrastructure (USDA, 2019). The project site is surrounded by Older Alluvium (Terrace Deposits) and underlain by bedrock of the Conejo Volcanics.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 76 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 The lots were graded in phases in 2000 to the bedrock and then engineered fill was placed on each lot. Eight- and ten-inch diameter subdrains were installed within the lots in accordance with the recommendation of the geotechnical report to avoid future water ponding and/or drainage issues. With proper drainage the proposed project would not pose an issue related to shrinking and swelling. Further, the proposed project would be subject to the CBC which controls the design and location of facilities in order to safeguard the public and reduce potential impacts related to expansive soils to less than significant levels.
e) No Impact. The proposed project would not include the installation or use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no construction or operational impacts associated with septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.
f) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. A geologic map review indicates the surficial geology of the project area consists of the Miocene-aged (23.03 to 5.333 million years ago) Conejo Volcanics (map unit Tco) and Pleistocene-age (2,580,000 to 11,700 years ago) Quaternary older alluvium (map unit Qoa) (Campbell et al., 2014). The Conejo Volcanics geologic unit consists of igneous rock, which is not conducive to the preservation of fossil resources. The Pleistocene-age Quaternary older alluvium is of appropriate age to contain paleontological resources.
The geotechnical report prepared for the project indicates the project area was subject to mass grading from mid-1990s through 2000 during which the project area’s higher elevations were reduced and the lower elevations filled in (Gorian 2019). As part of the grading, building pads were also developed using fill material. Grading removed the surficial sediments to depths wherein either bedrock or older alluvial sediments were encountered (Gorian 2019). As such, the present surface of the project area is comprised of engineered fill (map unit afl), Pleistocene-age alluvial terrace deposits (map unit Qt), and Conejo Volcanic bedrock.
A records search conducted by the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum (LACM) did not identify any fossil localities in the project area; however, it did indicate the presence two fossil localities within Pleistocene-age alluvial deposits in the project vicinity (McLeod, 2020). The closest fossil locality is LACM 1680, located approximately 2 miles southeast of the project, which produced fossil specimens of mammoth (Mammuthus) and horse (Equus) at depths of 14-15 below the ground surface.
The second fossil locality is LACM 560, located approximately 3 miles north of the project, which produced fossil specimens of horse (Equus) from unknown depths.
The geotechnical report indicates Pleistocene-age terrace deposits (Qt) are mapped at surface at various points within the project area. These deposits are of appropriate age to contain paleontological resources as indicated by the LACM’s identification of two fossil localities originating from similar Pleistocene deposits in the project’s vicinity. As such, project-related ground disturbance into portions of the project area mapped as containing Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 77 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Pleistocene terrace deposits at the surface have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature (Buildings 1, 4, 5, and 6). Implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through -3 would reduce impacts to paleontological resource and unique geologic features to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
GEO-1: Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall be trained to identify the types of paleontological resources that may be encountered during Project implementation. The training may be provided during the archaeological sensitivity training conducted pursuant to Mitigation Measure CUL-4. Documentation shall be retained demonstrating that all construction personnel attended the training.
GEO-2: The qualified paleontologist shall supervise a paleontological monitor meeting the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology standards (2010). The monitor shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities occurring within undisturbed native soils within areas mapped as Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Qt). Monitoring shall consist of visually inspecting fresh exposures of rock for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate, collecting wet or dry screened sediment samples of promising horizons for smaller fossil remains. Monitoring can be reduced to part-time inspections or ceased entirely if determined adequate by the qualified paleontologist in consultation with the City.
Monitoring activities shall be documented in a Paleontological Resources Monitoring Report to be prepared by the qualified paleontologist at the completion of construction and shall be provided to the City and filed with the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County within six (6) months of project completion.
GEO-3: If a unique geologic feature or paleontological resource is discovered during construction, the paleontological monitor shall be empowered to temporarily divert or redirect grading and excavation activities in the area of the exposed fossil to facilitate evaluation of the discovery. An appropriate buffer area shall be established by the qualified paleontologist around the find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. At the qualified paleontologist’s discretion and to reduce any construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock samples for initial processing and evaluation of the find. All significant fossils shall be collected by the paleontological monitor and/or the qualified paleontologist. Collected fossils shall be prepared to the point of identification and catalogued before they are submitted to their final repository.
Any fossils collected shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the fossils. If no institution accepts the fossil collection, they shall be donated to a local school in the area for educational purposes.
Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs shall also be filed at the repository and/or school.
Cumulative Impact
The proposed project impacts associated with geology, soils, and seismicity are site specific and would neither increase nor be magnified by potential impacts from impacts associated with geology, soils, and seismicity for related projects as listed on Table 2. The project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to fault rupture, ground shaking, landslides, and unstable Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 78 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 geologic units. However, as discussed in above, the proposed project has the potential to encounter significant paleontological resources. To reduce the potential impact to less than significant, the proposed project would implement mitigation measures GEO-1 through GEO-3.
Cumulative projects would also have the potential to encounter significant paleontological resources if ground-disturbing activities occur within undisturbed native soils. To reduce the potential impact to less than significant, the cumulative projects that include excavation within native soils would also be required to implement mitigation measures similar to Mitigation Measures as GEO-1 through GEO-3. With implementation of these mitigation measures, the potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to not cumulatively considerable and less than significant.
References
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2002, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Newbury Park
7.5-minute Quadrangle, Ventura County, California. CGS Seismic Hazard Zone Report 055, last revision date 1/13/06.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners / Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California. California Geological Survey Special Publication 42, Revised 2018.
Campbell, Russell H., Chris J. Wills, Pamela J. Irvine, and Brian J. Swanson. 2014. Preliminary Geologic Map of the Los Angeles 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, California. California Geological Survey, Sacramento, CA.
Chang, S.W., Bray, J.D., and Seed, R.B., 1994, Ground Motions and Local Site Effects. in Stewart, J.P., Bray, J.D., Seed, R.B. and Sitar, N. eds., Preliminary Report on the Principal Geotechnical Aspects of the January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, Report No.
UBC/EERC-94/08
Gorian and Associates, 2019. Geotechnical Site Evaluation Update Commercial Development of Tract 4823, Phases 1 and 3 Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard in the Newbury Park area of Thousand Oaks, California. Prepared for Thousand Oaks Master, LLC, by Gorian and Associates, Inc.
McLeod, Samuel. 2020. Paleontological resources for the proposed Conejo Summit Project, in the City of Thousand Oaks, Los Angeles County. Prepared for Environmental Science Associates by the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard procedures for the assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. Available at:
http://vertpaleo.org/Membership/Member-Ethics/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines.aspx Accessed January 3, 2017.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 79 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VIII. 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 an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a,b) Less-than-Significant Impact. State regulated GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). CO2 is the most abundant GHG in the atmosphere. Not all GHGs exhibit the same ability to induce climate change; as a result, GHG contributions are commonly quantified in equivalent mass of CO2, denoted as CO2e. Mass emissions are calculated by converting pollutant specific emissions to CO2e emissions by applying the proper global warming potential (GWP) value. These GWP ratios are available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and are published in the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) General Reporting Protocol. By applying the GWP ratios, Project related CO2e emissions can be tabulated in metric tons per year.
The City has not yet adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions and has not formally adopted a local plan for reducing GHG emission. When no guidance exists under CEQA, the lead agency may look to and assess general compliance with comparable regulatory schemes.8 In its January 2008 CEQA and Climate Change white paper, the California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) identified a number of potential approaches for determining the significance of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. In its white paper, CAPCOA suggests making significance determinations on a case-by-case basis when no significance thresholds have been formally adopted by a lead agency.
Amendments to Section 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines were adopted to assist lead agencies in determining the significance of the impacts of GHG emissions. Consistent with existing CEQA practice, Section 15064.4 gives lead agencies the discretion to determine whether to assess those emissions quantitatively or qualitatively. If a 8 See Protect Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1107 [“‘[A] lead agency’s use of existing environmental standards in determining the significance of a project’s environmental impacts is an effective means of promoting consistency in significance determinations and integrating CEQA environmental review activities with other environmental program planning and resolution.”’”]. Lead agencies can, and often do, use regulatory agencies’ performance standards. A project’s compliance with these standards usually is presumed to provide an adequate level of protection for environmental resources. See, e.g., Cadiz Land Co. v.
Rail Cycle (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 74, 99 (upholding use of regulatory agency performance standard).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 80 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 qualitative analysis is used, in addition to quantification, this section recommends certain qualitative factors that may be used in the determination of significance (i.e., extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions compared to the existing environment; whether the project exceeds an applicable significance threshold; and extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a reduction or mitigation of GHGs). The amendments do not establish a threshold of significance; rather, lead agencies are granted discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, including looking to thresholds developed by other public agencies, or suggested by other experts, such as CAPCOA, so long as any threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence (see Section 15064.7(c)). The California Natural Resources Agency has also clarified that the CEQA Guidelines amendments focus on the effects of GHG emissions as cumulative impacts, and that they should be analyzed in the context of CEQA’s requirements for cumulative impact analysis (see Section 15064(h)(3)).9
Although GHG emissions can be quantified, CARB, SCAQMD, and the City of Thousand Oaks have not adopted project-level significance thresholds for GHG emissions that would be applicable to the Project. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released a technical advisory on CEQA and climate change that provided some guidance on assessing the significance of GHG emissions, and states that “lead agencies may undertake a project-by-project analysis, consistent with available guidance and current CEQA practice,” and that while “climate change is ultimately a cumulative impact, not every individual project that emits GHGs must necessarily be found to contribute to a significant cumulative impact on the environment.”10 Furthermore, the technical advisory states that “CEQA authorizes reliance on previously approved plans and mitigation programs that have adequately analyzed and mitigated GHG emissions to a less than significant level as a means to avoid or substantially reduce the cumulative impact of a project.”11
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can be found not cumulatively considerable if the project would comply with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the geographic area of the project.12 To qualify, such a plan or program must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the 9 See generally California Natural Resources Agency, Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action (December 2009), pp. 11-13, 14, 16. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf, accessed November 2019; see also Letter from Cynthia Bryant, Director of the Office of Planning and Research to Mike Chrisman, Secretary for Natural Resources, April 13, 2009. Available at http://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/documents/Transmittal_LetterOPRApril2009.pdf, accessed November 2019.
10 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory – CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review, (2008). 11 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory – CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review, (2008). 12 14 CCR § 15064(h)(3).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 81 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 public agency.13 Examples of such programs include a “water quality control plan, air quality attainment or maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, [and] plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.”14 Thus, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) allows a lead agency to make a finding of non-significance for GHG emissions if a project complies with a program and/or other regulatory schemes to reduce GHG emissions.15
In the absence of any adopted, quantitative threshold, the Project would not have a significant effect on the environment if the Project is found to be consistent with the applicable regulatory plans and policies to reduce GHG emissions, including the emissions reduction measures discussed within CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, and City of Thousand Oaks policies established for the purpose of increasing energy efficiency and reducing GHG emissions for new developments and the City’s Green Building Code. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions from a variety of sources. First, GHG emissions would be generated during construction of the project. Once fully operational, the project’s operations would generate GHG emissions from direct sources such as electrical consumption and vehicle use.
Construction emissions are forecasted by assuming a conservative estimate of construction activities from each phase of the project. Construction emissions are estimated using the CalEEMod software. CalEEMod is based on outputs from OFFROAD and EMFAC, which are emissions estimation models developed by CARB and used to calculate emissions from construction activities, including off- and on-road vehicles.
Consistent with calculations in Section III, Air Quality, construction emissions were forecasted by assuming a conservative estimate of construction activities (i.e., assuming all construction occurs at the earliest feasible date) and applying the mobile source emissions factors. The emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod software and EMFAC2017. The output values used in this analysis were adjusted to be project-specific based on equipment types and the construction schedule. These values were then applied to the same construction phasing assumptions used in the criteria pollutant analysis in Section III, Air Quality, to generate GHG emissions values for the proposed project. 13 14 CCR § 15064(h)(3).
14 14 CCR § 15064(h)(3).
15 See, for example, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), CEQA Determinations of Significance for Projects Subject to ARB’s GHG Cap-and-Trade Regulation, APR-2025 (June 25, 2014), in which the SJVAPCD “determined that GHG emissions increases that are covered under ABR’s Cap-and-Trade regulation cannot constitute significant increases under CEQA…” Furthermore, the SCAQMD has taken this position in CEQA documents it has produced as a lead agency. The SCAQMD has prepared three Negative Declarations and one Draft Environmental Impact Report that demonstrate the SCAQMD has applied its 10,000 MTCO2e/yr significance threshold in such a way that GHG emissions covered by the Cap-and-Trade Program do not constitute emissions that must be measured against the threshold. See SCAQMD, Final Negative Declaration for Ultramar Inc. Wilmington Refinery Cogeneration Project, SHC No. 2012041014 (October 2014); SCAQMD Final Negative Declaration for Phillips 99 Los Angeles Refinery Carson Plant—Crude Oil Storage Capacity Project, SCH No. 2013091029 (December 2014); SCAQMD Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for Toxic Air Contaminant Reduction for Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 1420.1 and 1402 at the Exide Technologies Facility in Vernon, CA, SCH No. 2014101040 (December 2014); and SCAQMD Final Environmental Impact Report for the Breitburn Santa Fe Springs Blocks 400/700 Upgrade Project, SCH No. 2014121014 (August 2015).
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 82 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Industry standards recommend that construction project GHG emissions should be “amortized over a 30-year project lifetime, so that construction GHG emissions are included as part of the operational GHG life cycle. In accordance with that GHG emissions from construction have been amortized over the 30-year lifetime of the project and are added to the operational emissions for the determination of significance. Total estimated construction-related GHG emissions for the project are estimated at approximately 6,899 MTCO2e. This would equal to approximately 230 MTCO2e per year after amortization over 30 years.
Operation of the proposed project would result in GHG emissions from building operations, energy and water consumption, waste generation and mobile source operations. Emissions from the operation of the proposed project were modeled consistent with operational modeling in Section III, Air Quality. Table 10 represent the greenhouse gas emissions for the proposed project for both the initial operation year as well as the 2027 and 2040 potential buildout years.
TABLE 10
GHG EMISSIONS
Maximum GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year)
Source 2023 2027 2040
Area <1 <1 <1
Energy 607 1,043 295
Mobile 978 1,819 1,495
Waste 127 267 267
Water 233 422 201
Total Operational: 1,944 3,552 2,258
Amortized Construction: 230 230 230
Total Project: 2,174 3,782 2,488
SOURCE: ESA, 2021
Consistency with State Plan, Policies, or Regulations
AB 32 & EO B-30-15
In support of AB 32, the state has promulgated specific laws aimed at GHG reductions applicable to the Project. The Project’s HVAC system would be sized and designed in compliance with the CALGreen Code to maximize energy efficiency caused by heat loss and heat gain. The Project would also be designed with 100 percent drought tolerant shrubs and ground cover and approximately 75 percent drought tolerant trees, which would reduce water irrigation demand and associated GHG emissions. Further, as discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, the Project would implement mitigation measures TRAF-1 through TRAF-7 to create pedestrian and bicycle networks on site, provide 51 EV charging parking spots, and provide funding for local bicycle Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 83 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 infrastructure that would reduce the Project’s VMT in line with the general goals of Senate Bill 375 and the Southern California Association of Governments 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with State efforts to reduce motor vehicle emissions and congestion.
The Project would generate GHG emissions due to construction and operational activities; however, its annual GHG emissions would be reduced due to location and designs consistent with relevant goals and actions intended to encourage development that results in the efficient use of public and private resources. 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan
According to the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, reductions needed to achieve the 2030 goal is expected to be achieved by targeting specific emission sectors, including those sectors that are not directly controlled or influenced by the Project, but nonetheless contribute to project-related GHG emissions. Table 11 contains a list of GHG emission reduction actions and strategies from the 2017 Scoping Plan and describes the Project’s consistency.
TABLE 11
PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH
2017 CLIMATE CHANGE SCOPING PLAN ACTIONS AND STRATEGIES Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
Senate Bill 350 (SB 350):
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction
Act of 2015 increases the standards of the
California Renewable Portfolio Standard
(RPS) program by requiring that the amount of
electricity generated and sold to retail
customers per year from eligible renewable
energy resources be increased to 50 percent
by 2030.a
Required measures include:
Increase RPS to 50 percent of retail sales by
2030.
Establish annual targets for statewide energy
efficiency savings and demand reduction that
will achieve a cumulative doubling of
statewide energy efficiency savings in
electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030.
Reduce GHG emissions in the electricity
sector through the implementation of the
above measures and other actions as
modeled in IRPs to meet GHG emissions
reductions planning targets in the IRP
process. Load-serving entities and publicly
owned utilities meet GHG emissions
reductions planning targets through a
combination of measures as described in
IRPs.
CPUC, CEC, CARB Compliant. The Project would use electricity provided by Clean Power Alliance (CPA) and distributed by
Southern California Edison (SCE), which is required
to meet the energy performance standard of 50
percent renewable energy by 2030, along with
applicable GHG emissions reductions planning
targets in its Strategic Long-Term Resource Plan.
The legislation also included interim targets of 40
percent by 2024 and 45 percent by 2027. In 2019,
CPA provided customers three options of 36 percent,
50 percent, or 100 percent from renewable sources,
all of which exceeded the required target 33 percent
by 2020 established under previous legislation.b
As required under SB 350, doubling of the energy
efficiency savings from final end uses of retail
customers by 2030 would primarily rely on the
existing suite of building energy efficiency standards
under California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6
and utility-sponsored programs such as rebates for
high-efficiency appliances, HVAC systems, and
insulation. The Project would meet or exceed the
applicable requirements of Title 24, Part 6, as well as the California Green Building Standards Code in Title
24, Part 11.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 84 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
Implement Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner
Technology and Fuels):
x At least 1.5 million zero emission
and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric
vehicles by 2025.
x At least 4.2 million zero emission
and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric
vehicles by 2030.
x Further increase GHG stringency on
all light-duty vehicles beyond
existing Advanced Clean Cars
regulations.
x Implementation of federal phase 2
standards for medium- and heavyduty vehicles.
x Innovative Clean Transit: Transition
to a suite of to-be-determined
innovative clean transit options.
Assumed 20 percent of new urban
buses purchased beginning in 2018
will be zero emission buses with the
penetration of zero-emission
technology ramped up to 100
percent of new sales in 2030. Also,
new natural gas buses, starting in
2018, and diesel buses, starting in
2020, meet the optional heavy-duty
low-NOX standard.
x Last Mile Delivery: New regulation
that would result in the use of low
NOX or cleaner engines and the
deployment of increasing numbers
of zero-emission trucks primarily for
class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks in
California. This measure assumes
ZEVs comprise 2.5 percent of new
Class 3–7 truck sales in local fleets
starting in 2020, increasing to 10
percent in 2025 and remaining flat
through 2030.
x Further reduce VMT through
continued implementation of SB 375
and regional Sustainable
Communities Strategies;
forthcoming statewide
implementation of SB 743; and
potential additional VMT reduction
strategies not specified in the
Mobile Source Strategy but included
in the document “Potential VMT
Reduction Strategies for
Discussion.”
CARB, CalSTA,
SGC, Caltrans,
CEC, OPR, Local
Agencies
Compliant. CARB approved the Advanced Clean
Cars Program that includes Low-Emission Vehicle
(LEV) regulations that reduce criteria pollutants and
GHG emissions from light- and medium-duty
vehicles, and the Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV)
regulation, which requires manufacturers to produce
an increasing number of pure ZEVs (meaning battery
electric and fuel cell electric vehicles), with
provisions to also produce plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles (PHEV) in the 2018 through 2025 model
years. While this action does not directly apply to
individual projects, the standards would apply to all
vehicles purchased or used by students, staff,
faculty, and visitors to the Project. The Project would comply with CalGreen requirements regarding the
number of EV Ready and EV Capable parking
spaces to support ZEVs and PHEVs. As such, the
Project would support compliance with this
regulation.
The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation has two
components, a manufacturer sales requirement and
a reporting requirement. The manufacturer
component of the regulation requires manufacturers
that certify Class 2b-8 chassis or complete vehicles
with combustion engines would be required to sell
zero-emission trucks as an increasing percentage of
their annual California sales from 2024 to 2035. By
2035, zero-emission truck/chassis sales would need
to be 55 percent of Class 2b – 3 truck sales, 75
percent of Class 4 – 8 straight truck sales, and 40
percent of truck tractor sales. The reporting
component of the regulation requires large
employers including retailers, manufacturers, brokers
and others would be required to report information
about shipments and shuttle services. Fleet owners,
with 50 or more trucks, would be required to report
about their existing fleet operations.c
CARB is also developing the Innovative Clean
Transit measure to encourage purchase of advanced
technology buses such as alternative fueled or
battery powered buses. This would allow fleets to
phase in cleaner technology in the near future.
CARB is also in the process of developing proposals
for new approaches and strategies to achieve zero
emission trucks under the Advanced Clean Local
Trucks (Last Mile Delivery) Program.d GHG
emissions generated by transit trips by the Project
would be reduced under this regulation.
GHG emissions generated by Project-related
passenger, truck, and bus vehicular travel would
benefit from the above regulations and programs,
and mobile source emissions generated by the
Project would be reduced with implementation of
standards under the Advanced Clean Cars Program,
Advanced Clean Truck Regulation, and Innovative
Clean Transit measure consistent with reduction of
GHG emissions under SB 32. Mobile source GHG
emissions provided in Table 10 of the ISMND
conservatively do not specifically include the numeric
reduction in mobile source GHG emissions from the
above regulations as the CalEEMod model does not
yet fully account for these regulation or programs.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 85 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
SB 375 requires SCAG to direct the development of
the RTP/SCS for the region, which is discussed in
the Draft EIR. The Project would not conflict with the
RTP/SCS goal to adapt to a changing climate and to
support an integrated regional development pattern.
On an annualized basis, the Project is anticipated to
generate approximately 2,916 average daily
weekday vehicle trips under a worst-case scenario.
The Project would implement mitigation measures
TRAF-1 through TRAF-7 that are aimed at reducing
VMT through creation of pedestrian networks,
bicycle parking, electric vehicle charging stations,
rideshare programs, and funding for bicycle
infrastructure. This, together with the overall modest
increase in daily trips, would be consistent with the
2020-2045 RTP/SCS goal of reducing daily VMT per
capita. As such, the Project would not conflict with
the VMT reduction standards of the 2020-2045
RTP/SCS. Thus, the Project would be compliant
with, and would not conflict with, applicable 2020-
2045 RTP/SCS actions and strategies to reduce
GHG emissions.
Increase Stringency of SB 375 Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2035 Targets).
CARB Compliant. Under SB 375, CARB sets regional
targets for GHG emission reductions from passenger
vehicle use. In 2010, the CARB established targets
for 2020 and 2035 for each region. As required
under SB 375, the CARB is required to update
regional GHG emissions targets every 8 years,
which have been updated in 2018. As part of the
2018 updates, the CARB adopted a passenger
vehicle related GHG reduction of 19 percent per
capita for 2035 for the SCAG region. On an
annualized basis, the Project is anticipated to
generate approximately 2,916 average daily
weekday vehicle trips under a worst-case scenario.
The Project would implement mitigation measures
TRAF-1 through TRAF-7 that are aimed at reducing
VMT through creation of pedestrian networks,
bicycle parking, electric vehicle charging stations,
rideshare programs, and funding for bicycle
infrastructure. As such, the Project would not conflict with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goal of reducing daily
VMT per capita.
By 2019, adjust performance measures
used to select and design transportation
facilities.
x Harmonize project performance with
emissions reductions, and increase
competitiveness of transit and
active transportation modes (e.g.,
via guideline documents, funding
programs, project selection, etc.).
CalSTA and SGC,
OPR, CARB, GoBiz,
IBank, DOF, CTC,
Caltrans
Not Applicable. The Project would not involve
construction of transportation facilities.
By 2019, develop pricing policies to
support low-GHG transportation (e.g., lowemission vehicle zones for heavy duty, road user, parking pricing, transit
discounts).
CalSTA, Caltrans,
CTC, OPR/SGC,
CARB
Compliant. The Project would support this policy
through the implementation of TRAF-3, requiring the
construction of 51 EV Ready and EV Capable
parking spaces. As such, the Project would support
compliance with this regulation.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 86 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
Implement California Sustainable Freight
Action Plan:
x Improve freight system efficiency.
x Deploy over 100,000 freight
vehicles and equipment capable of
zero emission operation and
maximize both zero and near-zero
emission freight vehicles and
equipment powered by renewable
energy by 2030.
CalSTA, CalEPA,
CNRA, CARB,
Caltrans, CEC,
GoBiz
Compliant. The Project does not involve the
manufacture of vehicles or production of vehicle
fuels. However, vehicles that are purchased and
used within the Project Site would comply with any
vehicle and fuel standards that the CARB adopts or
has adopted. In addition, the Project would comply
with SCAQMD Rule 2305.
Adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a
CI reduction of 18 percent.
CARB Compliant. This regulatory program applies to fuel suppliers, not directly to land use development. GHG
emissions related to vehicular travel associated with
the Project would benefit from this regulation
because fuel used by Project-related vehicles would
be required to comply with LCFS. Mobile source
GHG emissions provided in Table 10 were
calculated using CalEEMod. However, CalEEMod
does not include implementation of the LCFS into
mobile source emission factors. Thus, Table 10
provides conservatively estimated GHG emissions.
On September 27, 2018, CARB approved an
amendment to the LCFS regulation to require a 20
percent reduction in carbon intensity from a 2010
baseline by 2030. Reductions in carbon intensity are
phased in starting in 2019 with a reduction of 6.25
percent and increases by 1.25 percent each year.
Thus, in 2021, LCFS emissions reductions are 8.75
percent reduced carbon intensity relative to the 2010
baseline. Project-related mobile source GHG
emissions would be reduced accordingly, and would
increase as LCFS compliance increases to 20
percent reduce carbon intensity by 2030 relative to
the 2010 baseline year.
Implement the Short-Lived Climate
Pollutant Strategy by 2030:
x 40-percent reduction in methane
and hydrofluorocarbon emissions
below 2013 levels.
x 50-percent reduction in black
carbon emissions below 2013
levels.
CARB, CalRecycle,
CDFA, SWRCB,
Local air districts
Compliant. Senate Bill 605 (SB 605), adopted in
2014, directs CARB to develop a comprehensive
Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) strategy.
Senate Bill 1383 was later adopted in 2016 to require
CARB to set statewide 2030 emission reduction
targets of 40 percent for methane and
hydrofluorocarbons and 50 percent black carbon
emissions below 2013 levels.e
SB 1383 requires various agencies including CARB,
California Department of Food and Agriculture
(CDFA), the State Water Resources Board
(SWRCB) to be responsible for adopting regulations
to reduce GHG emissions. These regulations would
be applicable to the Project. Therefore, the Project
would comply with the CARB SLCP Reduction
Strategy, which limits the use of hydrofluorocarbons
for refrigeration uses.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 87 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
By 2019, develop regulations and
programs to support organic waste landfill
reduction goals in the SLCP and SB 1383.
CARB, CalRecycle,
CDFA, SWRCB,
Local air districts
Compliant. Under SB 1383, the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle) is responsible for achieving a 50
percent reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and 75-
percent reduction by 2025. The Project would be
consistent with AB 341 which requires not less than
75 percent of solid waste generated to be source
reduced through recycling, composting, or diversion.
This reduction in solid waste generated by the
Project would reduce overall GHG emissions.
Compliance with AB 341 would also help achieve the
goals of SB 1383.
Implement the post-2020 Cap-and-Trade
Program with declining annual caps.
CARB Compliant. Assembly Bill 398 (AB 398) was enacted
in 2017 to extend and clarify the role of the State’s
Cap-and-Trade Program from January 1, 2021,
through December 31, 2030. As part of AB 398,
refinements were made to the Cap-and-Trade
program to establish updated protocols and
allocation of proceeds to reduce GHG emissions.
Under the Cap-and-Trade program, entities such as
power generation companies and natural gas
processing plants would be required to limit or
reduce GHG emissions. While the Project itself is not
a regulated entity under the Cap-and-Trade
Program, it would result in a reduction of GHG
emissions associated with the Project’s energy
usage, since energy supplied to the Project would be
from a regulated entity. As the Project would not
impede the Program’s progress, the Project is
considered compliant.
By 2018, develop Integrated Natural and
Working Lands Implementation Plan to
secure California’s land base as a net
carbon sink:
x Protect land from conversion
through conservation easements
and other incentives.
x Increase the long-term resilience of
carbon storage in the land base and
enhance sequestration capacity.
x Utilize wood and agricultural
products to increase the amount of
carbon stored in the natural and
built environments.
x Establish scenario projections to
serve as the foundation for the
Implementation Plan.
CNRA and
departments within,
CDFA, CalEPA,
CARB
Not Applicable. This regulatory program applies to
Natural and Working Lands, not directly related to
development of the Project. However, the Project
would not interfere or impede implementation of the
Integrated Natural and Working Lands
Implementation Plan.
Establish a carbon accounting framework
for natural and working lands as described
in SB 859 by 2018.
CARB Not Applicable. This regulatory program applies to Natural and Working Lands, not directly related to
development of the Project. However, the Project
would not interfere or impede implementation of the
Integrated Natural and Working Lands
Implementation Plan.
Implement Forest Carbon Plan. CNRA, CAL FIRE,
CalEPA and
departments within
Not Applicable. This regulatory program applies to
state and federal forest land, not directly related to
development of the Project. However, the Project
would not interfere or impede implementation of the
Forest Carbon Plan.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 88 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Compliance Analysis
Identify and expand funding and financing
mechanisms to support GHG reductions
across all sectors.
State Agencies &
Local Agencies
Not Applicable. Funding and financing mechanisms
are the responsibility of the state and local agencies.
The Project would not conflict with funding and
financing mechanisms to support GHG reductions.
a Senate Bill 350 (2015–2016 Regular Session) Stats 2015, Ch. 547. b LADWP, 2019 Power Content Label, Version October 2020, https://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/faces/ladwp/aboutus/a-power/a-ppowercontentlabel. Accessed May 18, 2021. c CARB, Advance Clean Cars, 2017 Midterm Review, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/2017-midterm-review-report. Accessed May 18, 2021.
d CARB, Advanced Clean Local Trucks, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-trucks. Accessed May 18, 2021. e CARB, Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCP): Organic Waste Methane Emissions Reductions, https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/climate/slcp/.
Accessed May 18, 2021.
SOURCE: ESA, 2021.
Conflict with City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Conservation Element.
The City of Thousand Oaks is in the process of developing a Climate and Environmental Action Plan (CEAP), which is intended to be a long-range plan that outlines comprehensive strategies to reduce GHG emissions and address other environmentally related issues. The City anticipates that implementation of the CEAP GHG emission reduction strategies will provide co-benefits to the community by reducing air pollution, supporting local economic development, increasing local resilience, improving public health and quality of life. The City anticipates review and approval by City Council in late 2021.
The City’s current General Plan Conservation Element 2013 Update includes a policy related to climate change and GHG emissions as follows:
x Policy CO-39: Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, consistent with the intent of the State of California’s California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32).
x Implementation Measures: Prepare Greenhouse Gas Analyses for development projects which require the preparation of Environmental Impact Reports or Mitigated Negative Declarations; Reduce energy use and utilize sustainable energy sources at City facilities where feasible, in accordance with City-adopted Energy Action Plan.
As discussed above, GHG emissions for the project have been analyzed and disclosed demonstrating that the project would not exceed the applicable significance threshold and that the project would not conflict with AB 32, EO B-30-15, SB 375, or the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the City General Plan and would not conflict with attainment of the goals of the Plan. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 89 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Cumulative Impact
As discussed above, Greenhouse Gas Emission, the primary source of GHG emissions generated by implementation of the proposed project would occur during construction, which would be temporary in nature. The proposed projects’ total construction and operational GHG emissions would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation, see Table 11, for the purposes of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Therefore, even when considered in conjunction with the projects listed on Table 2, the proposed projects’ impact would not be considered cumulatively significant.
References
Iteris 2020. Draft Shapell Industrial Project –CEQA Transportation Analysis. December 21.
Kimley Horn 2020. Shapell Traffic Study. May 15.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 90 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IX. 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 one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials 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 or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. The California Office of Emergency Services oversees state agencies and programs that regulate hazardous materials (Health and Safety Code, Article 1, Chapter 6.95). A hazardous material is any material that because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or environment. The proposed project would require the use of construction vehicles and equipment and thus involve the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oils, grease, equipment fluids, cleaning solutions and solvents, lubricant oils, and adhesives. If such hazardous materials were not handled properly, in accordance with federal, state and local regulations, a potentially significant hazards to the public or environmental could occur.
Existing federal and state law regulates the handling, storage and transport of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Pursuant to the federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 5101 et seq., the United States Department of Transportation promulgated strict regulations applicable to all trucks transporting Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 91 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 hazardous materials. Occupational safety standards have been established in federal and state laws to minimize worker safety risks from both physical and chemical hazards in the workplace, including construction sites. The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (CalOSHA) has primary responsibility for developing and enforcing standards for safe workplaces and work practices in California in accordance with regulations specified in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 8. For example, under Title 8 CCR 5194 (Hazard Communication Standard), construction workers must be informed about hazardous substances that may be encountered, and under Title 8 CCR 3203 (Injury Illness Prevention Program) workers must be properly trained to recognize workplace hazards and to take appropriate steps to reduce potential risks due to such hazards.
During construction, contractors handling, storing or transporting hazardous materials or wastes must comply with regulations that would reduce the risk of accidental release and provide protocols and notification requirements should an accidental release occur.
Operation and maintenance activities associated with the proposed project would potentially require transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials would be stored in appropriate containers within the various buildings and would be used in accordance with state and local regulations. Therefore, by complying with relevant federal, state, and local laws, the proposed project would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during implementation of the proposed project. b) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed above in the response to Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Issue IX. a), the proposed project would involve the routine use of hazardous materials during activities associated with construction; the transport, use, storage and disposal of such hazardous materials would be required to comply with existing applicable federal, state and local regulations. Accidental spills of small amounts of these materials could occur during routine transport, use, storage or disposal, and could potentially injure construction workers, contaminate soil, and/or affect the groundwater below the site. Impacts associated with the accidental release, although localized to the project site, could potentially create a significant hazard to the environment.
In the event of an accidental release during implementation of the proposed project, containment and clean up would be in accordance with existing applicable regulatory requirements. Title 8 CCR 5194 requires preparation of a hazards communication program identifying hazardous materials onsite and reducing the potential for a spill; and 29 CFR 1910.120 includes requirements for emergency response to releases or substantial threats of releases of hazardous substances. Contractors would be required to prepare and implement a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP), as required under the state Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act, to manage any hazardous materials they use during construction and operation, respectively. A HMBP is a document containing detailed information on the inventory of hazardous materials at a facility; Emergency Response Plans (ERP) and procedures in the event of a reportable release or threatened release of a hazardous material; a Site Safety Plan with provisions for training for all workers; a site map that contains north orientation, loading areas, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 92 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 internal roads, adjacent streets, storm and sewer drains, access and exit points, emergency shutoffs, hazardous material handling and storage areas, and emergency response equipment. Further, all spent hazardous materials would be disposed of in accordance with California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and County regulations. Construction and maintenance specifications prepared for the proposed project would identify BMPs to ensure the lawful transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials.
As discussed above, operation and maintenance activities associated with the proposed project could also require routine transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. In the event of an accidental release during operation of the proposed project, containment and clean up would be in accordance with existing applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, potential impacts to the public or the environment related to reasonably foreseeable accident conditions involving hazardous materials would be less than significant.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact. The nearest school to the project site is Conejo Adventist Elementary School located approximately 0.30 miles southwest of the project site.
Additionally, Passageway School is located approximately 0.36 miles southeast of the project site. Construction of the proposed project would require equipment that use petroleum oil or other fuels considered hazardous materials. Construction equipment would be contained within a designated work area and equipment would be stored within designated staging areas overnight. Vehicle fueling would be limited to designated fueling areas outfitted with secondary containment measures in case of spill. While these schools are not located within the designated one-quarter mile radius of the project site, construction workers would utilize applicable BMPs and would be required to comply with existing and future hazardous materials laws and regulations for the transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials. As discussed in IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials a,b) above, existing regulations and safety measures would reduce public exposure to hazardous materials. Adherence to applicable BMPs, federal, state, and local regulations, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact related to handling hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school. d) No Impact. A review of the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances List – Site Cleanup (Cortese List) indicates that there are no identified hazardous material sites located within the proposed project site (DTSC 2020a). Further, a database search of hazardous materials sites using the online DTSC EnviroStor and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker databases identified zero hazardous clean-up sites within the project area (DTSC 2020b; SWRCB 2020). A closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanup site is located east of the project at 1515 Rancho Conejo Boulevard. The potential contaminant was gasoline and the media of concern was an aquifer used for drinking water. However, the case was closed in October of 1996. In addition, approximately three quarters of a mile south of the project site, there is an open cleanup site that has been inactive since 2016 concerning solvents in the soil.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 93 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Since the proposed project would disturb an area of more than an acre, the project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, including the preparation and implementation of a site-specific SWPPP. The SWPPP would contain BMPs to monitor and prevent pollutants (including sediment and hazardous materials) from leaving the construction site in runoff. In addition, compliance with the federal and state standards would be required. Therefore, with implementation of BMPs and compliance with existing standards, construction of the proposed projects would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. The proposed project would not be located on a hazardous materials site and no impact would occur. e) No Impact. The nearest airport to the project is the Camarillo airport located approximately 8.4 miles west of the project site. The project would not be affected by operations of the Camarillo airport nor would implementation of the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise caused by an airport. No impact would occur. f) Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project could affect traffic in the surrounding area on Rancho Conejo Boulevard. As result, construction of the proposed project could interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. However, proposed project would include a traffic control plan that would ensure that there would be no inference with emergency response or evacuation plans. Once operational, the proposed project would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. The Traffic Control Plan would ensure that all public roads remain passable to emergency service vehicles during construction of the proposed project or clearly delineate alternate detour routes, if needed. In addition, the Traffic Control Plan would require emergency personnel be notified in advance of the proposed project schedule and any proposed road closures, including planned detour routes. Impacts would be considered less than significant.
g) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project is located in a highly urbanized area and while it is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Local Responsibility Area it would continue to be served by the Ventura County Fire Department (VCFD). The use of spark-producing construction machinery within these fire risk areas could create hazardous fire conditions and expose construction workers to wildfire risks. Impacts would be potentially significant during construction. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure fire hazard reduction measures are conducted during construction to reduce the potential for wildfire impacts on people or structures to less than significant levels. The operation of the proposed project would adhere to standard requirements set forth by the City Municipal Code, the CBC, and the California Fire Code, and include the creation and maintenance of wildfire buffers, and sprinkler and alarm requirements. As a result, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires to significant levels. Impacts related to wildland fire would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 94 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Mitigation Measure:
HAZ-1: During project implementation, the contractor shall require all spark arrestors on construction equipment to be in good working order. Contractors shall require all vehicles and crews to have access to functional fire extinguishers at all times.
Cumulative Impact
Hazardous materials are generally site specific and handled on a project-by-project basis.
Cumulative projects would be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local standards regarding the accidental release of hazardous materials. As such, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to the upset or accidental release of hazardous materials. However, the project would be located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Local Responsibility Area and includes Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 to reduce the potential for causing a wildfire during construction. The potential for wildland fires resulting in the loss of life or property is generally unique to each site. All cumulative projects are subject to the fire codes and regulations. The cumulative projects are all located within developed areas, but similar to the project, other cumulative projects would be required to include such features as fuel modification zones, fire access roads, and fire hydrants to reduce the risk of potential wildland fires. As a result, through the project’s compliance Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and with fire codes and regulations, the potential cumulative impacts from wildland fires would be less than significant.
References
Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), 2020a. Available online at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/, accessed October 2020.
DTSC, 2020b. EnviroStor Database. Available online at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed October 2020.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), 2020. GeoTracker. Available online at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed October 2020
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 95 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Hydrology and Water Quality
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY —
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
iii) 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;
or
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? ܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project consists of fine grading of level pads for the construction of the buildings on each of the lots. Conejo Center Drive and Rancho Conejo Boulevard adjacent to the project site have already been improved with utilities infrastructure stubbed out to the proposed lots, including but not limited to water, storm drain, electrical and sewer. Nevertheless, exposed soils would have the potential to erode and be transported down gradient areas, potentially resulting in water quality impacts. Additionally, stormwater runoff passing through the construction and staging sites has the potential to pick up construction-related pollutants.
Since the proposed project would disturb more than one acre during construction, the City would be required to obtain coverage under the Statewide Construction General Permit. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to one-acre or more, stockpiling and excavation. The Construction General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer. The SWPPP would identify BMPs to control erosion and sedimentation issues. Compliance with the Construction General Permit by Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 96 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 developing and implementing a SWPPP, would ensure issues related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant. Project operations would be subject to compliance with the existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and follow guidelines within the Ventura County Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures. Through compliance with Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the SWPPP, the Ventura County Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, the project would maintain water quality standards during construction. During operations, Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs, to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, would assure water is contained and slowed to infiltrate the groundwater as much as possible, which reduces pollutants (total dissolved solids) entering the water stream and assures the volume of runoff leaving the site is not increased. As such, the project would have a lessthan-significant impact with regard to violating any state or federal water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project is the construction of 15 industrial buildings within an approved Specific Plan area. The project would not require the use of groundwater. Potable water would be supplied by Cal Am via Calleguas Municipal Water District. The construction of the buildings would require the use of water for concrete, dust suppression, and equipment cleaning. Construction would not affect groundwater supplies because the quantity of water used would be minimal. Once constructed, the proposed project would result in an increase in new impervious surface. However, rainwater falling on the project site would be captured and treated on-site pursuant to the General Industrial Stormwater Permit and would comply with SWPPP requirements and follow guidelines within the Ventura County Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures, as discussed above. Once treated in compliance with the General Industrial Stormwater Permit, the rainwater would be routed to on-site infiltration systems (e.g., infiltration swales) or to the storm drain system and returned to the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c.i–iv) Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed projects would not alter existing drainages that could result in erosion or flooding or exceed the capacity of a drainage system. Potential stormwater quality impacts during construction are evaluated in Hydrology and Water Quality Impact X a), above.
Once constructed, the project would result in an alteration of the drainage pattern of the existing land surface. The impact would be the addition of hardscape that would concentrate the flow of surface water runoff. This concentrated flow could result in substantial drainage issues related to erosion, siltation, flooding, drainage system capacity, or additional sources of polluted runoff. However, the project would include design features including bioswales and catch basins with filters for each of the 15 buildings. The stormwater calculations and associated design feature for each building to reduce flooding and pollution runoff can be found in Appendix F. In addition, compliance with MS4 development design would ensure that the new buildings do not Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 97 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 channelize runoff in a manner that could cause scouring and erosion, and captures water prior to runoff from the facility. Impacts would be less than significant. d) No Impact. The proposed project area is located within the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) Flood Zone X, indicating a moderate to low risk for flooding (FEMA, 2019). The proposed project is located on a mesa and there are no waterbodies with the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project site is located approximately 12 miles away from the Pacific Ocean and would not be subject to the maximum force of a Pacific Ocean tsunami and would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation from a tsunami. No impact would occur.
e) No Impact. The proposed project does not involve extraction of groundwater and would be required to comply with the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) in accordance with California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Stormwater runoff from the site would comply with mandated BMPs as discussed above. Therefore, the proposed project does not conflict with implementation of a water quality control plan or groundwater management plan and impacts would be less than significant.
Cumulative Impact
Significant cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality could occur if the incremental impacts of the proposed project combined with the incremental impacts of one or more of the cumulative projects identified in Table 2 to substantially increase a significant risk to people or their environment.
All of these projects would be subject to the same previously discussed regulatory requirements.
That is, cumulative projects that have the potential to impact hydrology and water quality would also be required to comply with NPDES Construction General Permit and its required SWPPP, the NPDES Municipal Permits and its MS4 BMP requirements, and the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program and its required HMBP, all designed to prevent impacts to water quality and have procedures in place for responding to spills. While it is possible that the proposed project and cumulative projects could result in releases of sediment and/or pollutants that could adversely affect water quality, the responsible parties associated with each project would be required to control runoff and respond to spills to the same established regulatory standards. Accordingly, the cumulative impact with respect to water quality would not be cumulatively considerable. Compliance with these regulations would prevent erosion, siltation, and flooding. Accordingly, no significant cumulative impact with respect to hydrology would result.
References
Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA), 2019. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 98 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Land Use and Planning
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ܆ ܆ ܆ ܈
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) No Impact. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a linear feature, such as a highway or railroad, or removal of a means of access, such as a road or bridge that would impact mobility within or between existing communities. The proposed project would be located entirely on property that has been planned for development, Specific Plan No. 7. Once constructed, the proposed project would not create a barrier or physically divide an established community, therefore, no impact would occur.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would be located within Planning Units B (southern portion), 5, and Q identified in Specific Plan No. 7. The development standards provided in the Specific Plan are applicable to the proposed project. Specific Plan No.7 designates the parcels as Employment Park and is zoned Industrial Park (M-1).
Construction and operation of the proposed project would not cause a change to the current land use or create a significant impact to its land use designation. A consistency analysis with the General Plan was prepared and is presented in Table 12. As shown in Table 12, the project would be consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan regarding an industrial development. Therefore, the proposed project would be compatible with the General Plan and existing land use designations and zoning, and impacts would be less than significant.
TABLE 12
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis
Goal 6: To provide and maintain a system of
natural open space and trails
Consistent: As discussed in Section XVI. Recreation, the proposed project includes an eight-foot multi-use/equestrian easement along the east side of the proposed Academy
Drive and an additional three-foot multi-use/equestrian easement along the north side of Conejo Center Drive. This multi-use/equestrian trail will eventually connect to the proposed equestrian trail along Academy Drive west of the proposed project and the COSCA Western Plateau Trail.
Policy 5: Highly intensive land uses--major
industrial and commercial centers--should be
located in proximity to or within easy access of
the Ventura Freeway corridor
Consistent: The proposed project would be located entirely on property that has been planned for development, Specific Plan No. 7. The proposed project would be located within Planning Units B (southern portion), 5, and Q identified in Specific Plan No. 7. The site is within close proximity of the 101 Freeway.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 99 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis
Industrial Policy 1: Industrial development
should occur in the designated major
complexes near the Ventura Freeway and at
the western and eastern ends of the Planning
Area (Rancho Conejo and Westlake industrial
areas).
Consistent: The proposed project would be located entirely on property that has been planned for development, Specific Plan No. 7. The proposed project would be located within Planning Units B (southern portion), 5, and Q identified in Specific Plan No. 7. The site is within close proximity of the 101 Freeway.
Industrial Policy 2: The City shall continue to
encourage light industries that are highly
specialized, scientific or research-oriented.
Consistent: The proposed project would be located entirely on property that has been planned for development, Specific Plan No. 7. The area to the south has been developed
resulting in a biotech corridor with companies such as
Amgen and Teledyne Technologies.
Industrial Policy 4: Industrial development should
comply with the City's height restrictions.
Exceptions, through height overlays, may be
appropriate under certain conditions
Consistent: As discussed in Section I. Aesthetics, the
buildings’ architecture would be similar in style, mass and height as the existing surrounding industrial buildings. The building would be consistent with the height restrictions.
Circulation Policy 7:Access to industrial areas
shall be via major arterials to minimize impacts
to residential areas.
Consistent: The proposed project would be located entirely on property that has been planned for development, Specific Plan No. 7. The area is accessible by Rancho Conejo
Boulevard major arterial.
Circulation Policy 10: The City shall maintain a
Level of Service C on all roads and at all
intersections. Lower levels of service may be
tolerated to preserve or enhance landscaping
and aesthetic integrity.
Consistent: As discussed in Section XVII. Transportation, a vehicles miles traveled (VMT) analysis was prepared for the project. The analysis identified impacts and identified mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to below a
level of significance.
Additional Policy 3: Air Quality: The City shall
place high priority on maintaining and
improving local and regional air quality.
Consistent: See Section III Air Quality for the proposed projects potential air quality impacts. The analysis identified impacts and identified mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to below a level of significance.
Additional Policy 4: Archaeological: The City
shall preserve and protect archaeological
resources for future generations and the
Conejo Valley's cultural heritage.
Consistent: See Section V Cultural Resources and Section XVIII Tribal Cultural Resources for the proposed projects potential impacts. The analysis identified impacts and
identified mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to below a level of significance.
Additional Policy 5: Conservation/Natural
Resources: The City shall preserve and protect
the unique biodiversity of the City's open
spaces and wetlands, including natural arroyos
and oak trees.
Consistent: The proposed project would be constructed
within an approved Specific Plan area on lots that have been previously grade. The site plans have been designed to
avoid natural resources.
SOURCE: City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Goals and Policies, adopted December 22, 1970, last amended January 28, 1997. Accessed on March 10, 2021 at https://www.toaks.org/departments/community-development/planning/ generalplan/general-plan-goals-and-policies.
Cumulative Impact
The proposed project is fully consistent with General Plan Goals and Policies and the construction and operation of the proposed project would not cause a change to the current land use or create a significant impact to its land use designation. Because related projects would be subject to existing land use and zoning regulations and would not be located within the immediate project vicinity, cumulative land use impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to cause incremental impacts to land use and planning when considering related past, present, or foreseeable future projects, and no mitigation measures are required to reduce cumulative impacts.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 100 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Mineral Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) No Impact. According to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Land Classification maps, the proposed project is located in an area with a mineral land classification of MRZ-1 (DOC, 2020). These are areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence (CDMG, 1981). No significant mineral resources exist within the Thousand Oaks planning area; mineral resources are not inventoried in the General Plan and it contains no policies related to mineral resources (City of Thousand Oaks, 2013). According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Resources Data System, the project area is not identified as a known mineral resource area and does not have a history of mineral extraction uses (USGS 2020). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource, and no impact would occur.
b) No Impact. The proposed project area is not currently used for mineral extraction and is not known as a locally important resource recovery site. Further, the project area is not delineated on the City of Thousand Oaks General Plan for mineral resource recovery uses. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Cumulative Impact
The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to mineral resources. The project would be located in an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. Therefore, even in combination with other projects that may interfere with mineral resources listed on Table 2, the proposed projects’ contribution would not be cumulatively considerable and would not result in a cumulative impact as the proposed projects would not interfere with or obstruct access to mineral resources in the area
References
California Department of Conservation. Newbury Park Quadrangle, Special Report 145 Plate
1.17. Available online at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sr/SR_145/, accessed March 20, 2020.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 101 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 California Division of Mines and Geology. 1981. Special Report 145, Parts I, II, and III, Mineral Land Classification of Ventura County. Available online at:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Documents/ClassDesig.pdf, Accessed March 20, 2020
City of Thousand Oaks, 2013. City of Thousand Oaks General Plan, Conservation Element, amended October 22,2013
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2020. Mineral Resources Data System. Available at:
https://mrdata.usgs.gov/mineral-resources/mrds-us.html. Accessed March 20, 2020.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 102 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Noise
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIII. NOISE — Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. Noise is defined as unwanted sound; however, not all unwanted sound rises to the level of a potentially significant noise impact. To differentiate unwanted sound from potentially significant noise impacts, the City of Thousand Oaks has established noise regulations. The following analysis evaluates potential noise impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed project.
Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a liquid or gaseous medium (e.g., air). Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound (i.e., loud, unexpected, or annoying sound). Acoustics is defined as the physics of sound. In acoustics, the fundamental scientific model consists of a sound (or noise) source, a receiver, and the propagation path between the two. The loudness of the noise source and obstructions or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path to the receiver determines the sound level and characteristics of the noise perceived by the receiver. Acoustics addresses primarily the propagation and control of sound.
Sound, traveling in the form of waves from a source, exerts a sound pressure level (referred to as sound level) that is measured in decibels (dB), which is the standard unit of sound amplitude measurement. The dB scale is a logarithmic scale (i.e., not linear) that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound, with 0 dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of human hearing and 120 to 140 dB corresponding to the threshold of pain. In a non-controlled environment, a change in sound level of 3 dB is considered “just perceptible,” a change in sound level of 5 dB is considered “clearly noticeable,” and a change in 10 dB is perceived as a doubling of sound volume (Caltrans 2013a). Pressure waves traveling through air exert a force registered by the human ear as sound.
The typical human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies of the audible sound spectrum. As a consequence, when assessing potential noise impacts, sound is measured using an electronic filter that deemphasizes the frequencies below 1,000 hertz (Hz) and Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 103 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 above 5,000 Hz in a manner corresponding to the human ear’s decreased sensitivity to extremely low and extremely high frequencies. This method of frequency weighting is referred to as A-weighting and is expressed in units of A-weighted decibels (dBA). Aweighting follows an international standard methodology of frequency de-emphasis and is typically applied to community noise measurements.
An individual’s noise exposure is a measure of noise over a period of time, whereas a noise level is a measure of noise at a given instant in time. Community noise varies continuously over a period of time with respect to the contributing sound sources of the community noise environment. Community noise is primarily the product of many distant noise sources, which constitute a relatively stable background noise exposure, with the individual contributors unidentifiable. The background noise level changes throughout a typical day, but does so gradually, corresponding with the addition and subtraction of distant noise sources such as traffic. What makes community noise variable throughout a day, besides the slowly changing background noise, is the addition of short-duration, single-event noise sources (e.g., aircraft flyovers, motor vehicles, sirens), which are readily identifiable to the individual. These successive additions of sound to the community noise environment change the community noise level from instant to instant, requiring the measurement of noise exposure over a period of time to legitimately characterize a community noise environment and evaluate cumulative noise impacts.
The time-varying characteristic of environmental noise over specified periods of time is described using statistical noise descriptors in terms of a single numerical value, expressed as dBA. The most frequently used noise descriptors are summarized below:
Leq: The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is used to describe the noise level over a specified period of time, typically 1-hour, i.e., Leq(1), expressed as Leq. The Leq may also be referred to as the “average” sound level.
Lmax: The maximum, instantaneous noise level.
Lmin: The minimum, instantaneous noise level.
Lx: The noise level exceeded for specified percentage (x) over a specified time period; i.e., L50 and L90 represent the noise levels that are exceeded 50 and 90 percent of the time specified, respectively.
Ldn: The Ldn is the average noise level over a 24-hour period, including an addition of 10 dBA to the measured hourly noise levels between the hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. to account nighttime noise sensitivity. Ldn is also termed the daynight average noise level or DNL, CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), is the average noise level over a 24-hour period that includes an addition of 5 dBA to the measured hourly noise levels between the evening hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., and an addition of 10 dBA to the measured hourly noise levels between the nighttime hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. to account for noise sensitivity during the evening and nighttime hours, respectively.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 104 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code
City currently regulates the hours of construction activity to limit the impact of construction noise. As a matter of compliance with regulatory requirements enforced through standard conditions of approval for all construction projects within the City, project generated noise would be subject to existing noise ordinance regulations in the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code (TOMC). In particular, Title 8, Section 8-11.01, “Construction activities restricted to certain hours,” states the following:
“It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in or conduct any activity in the construction of any building or structure, the moving of earth, or the laying of any pavement, including, but not limited to, the making of any excavation, clearing or grading of surface land, and loading or unloading material, equipment, or supplies, except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, unless a permit for each work at different hours or days has first been issued by the Public Works Director.” In addition, TOMC Sec. 4-3.804(a) requires vehicles propelled by an internal combustion engine on private property to have state-approved spark arrestors or a noise-muffling device approved by the state.
On-Site Construction Noise
Noise from on-site construction activities would be generated by the use of equipment involved during various stages of the construction activities. The noise levels generated by construction equipment would vary depending on factors such as the type and number of equipment, the specific model (horsepower rating), the construction activities being performed, and the maintenance condition of the equipment. Individual pieces of construction equipment anticipated to be used during the proposed project construction could produce maximum noise levels of 75 dBA to 85 dBA Lmax at a reference distance of 50 feet from the noise source, as shown in Table 13. These maximum noise levels would occur when equipment is operating under full power conditions. The estimated usage factor for the equipment is also shown in Table 13. The usage factors are based on the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (FHWA 2006).
To characterize construction-period noise levels, the hourly Leq noise level associated with each construction phase is estimated based on the quantity, type, and usage factors for each type of equipment used during each construction phase and are typically attributable to multiple pieces of equipment operating simultaneously. Over the course of a construction day, the highest noise levels would be generated when multiple pieces of construction equipment are operated concurrently. The estimated noise levels at noise sensitive receptors were calculated using the FHWA’s RCNM and were based on a maximum concurrent operation of construction equipment, which is considered a worstcase evaluation. This is considered a worst-case scenario because the project would typically use less equipment simultaneously, and as such would generate lower noise levels during construction.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 105 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 TABLE 13
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND ESTIMATED NOISE LEVELS
Source
Estimated Usage
Factor (%)
Reference Noise
Level at 50 feet (dBA
Lmax)
Cranes 16% 81
Dozers 40% 82
Dump/Haul Trucks 40% 76
Excavators 40% 81
Forklifts 10% 75
Front End Loaders 40% 79
Graders 40% 85
Other Equipment 50% 85
Pavers 50% 77
Rollers 20% 80
Scrapers 40% 84
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 25% 80
Water Trucks 10% 80
SOURCE: FHWA 2006
Table 14 shows the estimated maximum construction noise levels that would occur at the nearest off-site sensitive uses during a peak day of construction activity at the project site.
As shown in Table 14, for the nearest sensitive receptor, construction noise levels were estimated to reach a maximum of 62 dBA Leq during the overlap of several construction phases (all grading/excavation phases, Phase 1 building construction, and Phase 2 building construction). However, these increases would only occur for a temporary duration at the nearest sensitive receptor location as construction activities would occur throughout the project site and result in lower noise levels at greater distances.
Construction would occur Monday through Friday, within the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. and no construction would occur on the weekends. As such, the proposed project is consistent with TOMC Title 8, Section 8-11.01, which limits construction to between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and at no time on Sunday. As a result, compliance with applicable noise standards established in the TOMC, in particular, Title 8, Section 8-11.01, would reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 106 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 TABLE 14
UNMITIGATED MAXIMUM CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS AT SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Source
Estimated
Distance (feet)
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Phase 1 and 2 Fine Grading/Excavation 1,250 57
Phase 3, 4, and 7 Fine Grading/Excavation 2,250 51
Phase 5 and 6 Grading/Excavation 2,000 51
Building Construction – Phase 1 1,250 57
Building Construction – Phase 2 1,250 57
Building Construction – Phase 3 2,250 52
Building Construction – Phase 4 2,600 50
Building Construction – Phase 5 2,000 53
Building Construction – Phase 6 2,600 50
Building Construction – Phase 7 2,500 51
Maximum Noise Level – All Grading Phases
+ Building Construction Phase 1 and 2
- 62
NOTES: Detailed construction noise calculations are provided in Appendix G.
SOURCE: ESA 2020
Off-Site Construction Noise
Regarding construction truck and vehicle trips, construction worker commutes and trucks hauling materials and equipment to and from the project site would be the primary generator of offsite mobile sources. A maximum of approximately 179 worker trips per day, and up to 82 haul and vendor trucks per day during all excavation and Phase 1 and 2 building construction phases would occur (based on the air quality modeling included in Appendix A. Noise associated with construction truck trips were estimated using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 method described in FHWA Traffic Noise Model Technical Manual (FHWA 1998) and based on the maximum number of worker and truck trips in a peak hour (assuming an 8-hour workday). The results of the analysis indicate that the proposed project construction-related trips would generate noise levels of approximately 54.3 dBA Leq at the noise sensitive receptors along Rancho Conejo Boulevard between Conejo Spectrum Street and Corporate Center Drive. A representative noise level from the City’s General Plan Noise Element was used to determine the incremental increase in noise levels caused by on-road construction vehicles (City of Thousand oaks, 2000). The representative existing noise level of 54.7 dBA Leq combined with the estimated construction noise level of 54.3 dBA Leq would result in a combined noise level of 57.5 dBA Leq and a noise level increase of 2.8 dBA Leq over existing. A change of less than 1 dBA in sound levels generally cannot be perceived by the human ear and an increase of 3 dBA would be barely perceivable (Caltrans, 2013). As the increase in construction traffic noise levels generated by the proposed project would not exceed the 3 dBA thresholds barely perceivable by the Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 107 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 human ear, the proposed project’s construction traffic noise impact would be less than significant.
Operational Noise
Potential long-term noise impacts from the proposed project would result from activities associated with vehicular noise generation on area roadways and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. These increases could result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels on area roadways. To predict the noise increase due to vehicular traffic, the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Traffic Noise Model (TNM), Version 2.5, was used to predict vehicular traffic noise levels at off-site noise-sensitive receivers based on peak hour trip rates and trip distribution from the traffic study (Kimley Horn 2020). The estimated noise contribution from project trips was then compared to existing noise levels that are representative of the proposed project area taken from the City’s General Plan Noise Element (City of Thousand Oaks, 2000) The project noise contribution, existing noise levels, and estimated combined noise levels are shown in Table 15.
TABLE 15
PREDICTED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
Roadway Segment
Project
Noise
Contribution
(Leq, dBA)
Existing
Noise
Level
(Leq, dBA)
Combined Noise
Level (Project +
Existing)
(Leq, dBA)
Increase over
Existing Noise
Level (Combined
– Existing)
Rancho Conejo Boulevard
Between Conejo Spectrum Street
and Corporate Center Drive 53.4 54.7 57.1 2.4
SOURCE: ESA, 2020, City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Noise Element, 2000 As shown in Table 15, the predicted combined traffic noise levels would increase existing noise levels along the analyzed roadway by 2.4 dBA Leq. A change of less than 1 dBA in sound levels generally cannot be perceived by the human ear and an increase of 3 dBA would be barely perceivable (Caltrans, 2013). As the increase in traffic noise levels generated by the proposed project would not exceed the 3 dBA thresholds barely perceivable by the human ear, the proposed project’s traffic noise impact would be less than significant.
In addition, the proposed project would result in the operation of on-site stationary noise sources, including HVAC units on new buildings. HVAC equipment would be a primary (loudest) operational noise source on-site associated with the proposed project. Noise levels from HVAC equipment vary significantly depending on unit efficiency, size, and location but generally average from 45 dBA to 70 dBA Leq at 50 feet (USEPA 1971).
HVAC Noise levels are typically attenuated by design, baffling, enclosures, barriers and distance. Assuming a worst-case noise level of 70 dBA Leq at 50 feet and accounting for distance attenuation, the closest sensitive receptors located approximately 1,250 feet east Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 108 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 of the proposed project would experience noise levels of 41.8 dBA Leq. A noise level of
41.8 dBA Leq would not increase noise levels above typical ambient noise levels in a suburban environment. In addition, the City does not place specific numerical limits on noise levels from the operation of HVAC. Operational noise levels from HVAC would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would be constructed using typical construction techniques, such as jack hammers, bulldozers, and loaded trucks. As such, it is anticipated that the equipment to be used during construction would generate groundborne vibration.
Ground-borne vibration is primarily generated from the use of construction equipment and from heavy-duty vehicle traffic and trains. Ground-borne vibration propagates from the source through the ground to adjacent buildings by surface waves. Vibration energy dissipates as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration amplitude to decrease with distance away from the source. Vibration in buildings is typically perceived as rattling of windows, shaking of loose items, or the motion of building surfaces. The vibration of building surfaces also can be radiated as sound and heard as a low-frequency rumbling noise, known as ground-borne noise. Vibration levels for potential structural damage is described in terms of the peak particle velocity (PPV) measured in inches per second (in/sec). Road vehicles rarely create enough ground-borne vibration amplitude to be perceptible to humans unless the receiver is in immediate proximity to the source or the road surface is poorly maintained and has potholes or bumps.
Human sensitivity to vibration varies by frequency and by receiver. Generally, people are more sensitive to low-frequency vibration. Human annoyance also is related to the number and duration of events; the more events or the greater the duration, the more annoying it becomes. Ground-borne vibration related to human annoyance is generally related to root mean square (rms) velocity levels and expressed as velocity in decibels (VdB).
The City of Thousand Oaks does not address vibration in the City’s municipal code or general plan noise elements. Thus, for the proposed program, the Federal Transit Authorities (FTA)’s criteria for structural damage and human annoyance from the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA, 2018) was used. With respect to residential and commercial structures, the FTA, provides a vibration damage potential criterion for continuous/frequent intermittent vibration sources of 0.5 in/sec PPV for Category I, Reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) buildings, which includes newer residential structures and modern industrial/commercial buildings and 0.2 in/sec PPV for Category III, Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, which includes older residential structures (FTA 2018). The guidance also provides an 80 VdB threshold for construction and operational vibration impacts associated with human annoyance for infrequent events (FTA 2018). The proposed project’s construction activities would generate vibration at vibration-sensitive receptors infrequently from occasional equipment activity and only when within 50 to 100 feet from vibration-sensitive Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 109 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 receptors. Therefore, consistent with the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, the criteria for infrequent events is used. Further, the closest buildings assessed for structural damage are 50 feet southeast of the project site and are evaluated as Category I buildings with a threshold 0.5 in/sec.
Construction Vibration
According to the FTA, ground vibrations from construction activities very rarely reach the level that can damage structures. A possible exception is the case of old, fragile buildings of historical significance where special care must be taken to avoid damage (FTA 2006). The construction activities that typically generate the most severe vibrations are blasting, which would not be utilized for the proposed project. The proposed project would utilize construction equipment such as use of loaded trucks and bulldozer, which would generate groundborne vibration during construction activities. The vibration velocities at various distances for several types of construction equipment that can generate perceptible vibration levels are identified in Table 16. Based on the information presented in Table 16, vibration velocities could range from 0.003 to 0.076 in/sec PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity.
TABLE 16
VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
Approximate PPV (in/sec)
25 Feet 50 Feet 60 Feet 75 Feet 100 Feet 200 Feet 300 Feet Bore/Drill Rig 0.0890 0.0361 0.0285 0.0213 0.0147 0.0060 0.0035 Loaded Trucks 0.0760 0.0309 0.0244 0.0182 0.0125 0.0060 0.0035 Jackhammer 0.0350 0.0142 0.0112 0.0084 0.0058 0.0051 0.0030 Small Bulldozer 0.0030 0.0012 0.0010 0.0007 0.0005 0.0023 0.0014 SOURCE: FTA 2018; ESA 2020.
As stated earlier, a distance of 50 feet is used as the conservatively estimated average closest distance for construction equipment to adjacent sensitive receptors around the project site. Based on the vibration levels presented in Table 16, at a distance of 50 feet from the project site, the maximum vibration level would be up to approximately 0.076 in/sec PPV for loaded truck, which would not exceed the significance threshold of 0.5 in/sec PPV. Therefore, the use of construction equipment would not result in a groundborne vibration velocity level above 0.5 inches per second at the nearest off-site structure and impacts would be less than significant.
With respect to human annoyance, FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment identifies residential buildings, not commercial buildings, as vibration sensitive receptors for human annoyance. The closest residential building is located approximately 1,250 feet east of the project site. As discussed above, per FTA guidance, the significance criteria for human annoyance is 80 VdB for sensitive uses, including Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 110 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 residential uses. Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration and at a distance of 1,250 feet, the vibration levels would be imperceptible and indistinguishable from any background vibration. Therefore, the use of construction equipment would not result in vibration levels that would cause human annoyance and impacts would be less than significant.
Operational Vibration
The proposed project’s day-to-day operations would include typical commercial-grade stationary mechanical and electrical equipment, such as air handling units, condenser units, and exhaust fans, which would produce vibration at low levels that would not cause structural damage or human annoyance impacts to the project buildings or on-site occupants and would not cause vibration impacts to the off-site environment. In addition, the primary sources of transient vibration would include passenger vehicle circulation within the proposed parking area. According to America Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), pumps or compressor would generate ground-borne vibration levels of 0.5 in/sec PPV at 1 foot. It is anticipated that project mechanical equipment, including air handling units, condenser units, and exhaust fans, would be located on building rooftops. Therefore, ground-borne vibration from the operation of such mechanical equipment would not impact any of the off-site sensitive receptors. Therefore, structural damage and human annoyance vibration impacts from the Project operation would be less than significant.
c) No Impact. The proposed project would not locate noise-sensitive uses within an airport land use plan area, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an exposure of noise-sensitive uses to excessive noise levels from such uses.
No impact would occur.
Cumulative Impact
As described above, the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels and impacts would be less than significant. Impacts associated with temporary ambient noise levels would also be less than significant; temporary noise impacts would be intermittent and short in duration given the constant mobility of construction activities.
Further, there would be no impact related to airports since the proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan, private airstrip, or public airport. Typically, groundborne vibration generated by man-made activities (i.e., rail and roadway traffic, operation of mechanical equipment, and typical construction equipment) diminishes rapidly with distance from the vibration source. The other related projects are located at a sufficient distance from the project site and would not combine with the project to create cumulative impact on sensitive receptors.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 111 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 References
America Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning Applications, 1999
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2013a. Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), Section 2.2.1, September 2013. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tenssep2013.pdf. Accessed July 2020.
Caltrans, 2013b. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, September 2013.
Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgm-sep2013.pdf. Accessed July 2020.
California Estimator Emissions Model, Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod, October 2017. Available: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016- 3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6. Accessed July 2020.
City of Thousand Oaks, General Plan Noise Element, 2000. Available:
https://www.toaks.org/home/showdocument?id=340#:~:text=The%20Noise%20Element% 20of%20the,issues%20and%20review%20draft%20policies. Accessed July 2020.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model – RCNM and User Guide, January 2006. Available at:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/rcnm/. Accessed June 2020.
Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006. Available at:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/FTA_Noise_and_Vibration_Manual .pdf. Accessed July 2020.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 112 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Population and Housing
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project entails the construction of 15 industrial buildings and associated infrastructure such as parking lots and lighting within an approved Specific Planning area. While the project could promote growth in the local area, this is a planned development as discussed in the City of Thousand Oaks Rancho Conejo Specific Plan 7. Further, construction jobs would be temporary and are highly specialized. Construction workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. As such, the project would not induce growth that is not accounted for by the City of Thousand Oaks and impacts would be less than significant. b) No Impact. The existing conditions of the project site are either undeveloped land or existing industrial buildings. Implementation of the proposed project would not include a residential component and would not displace any existing housing through construction or operation. As such, the project would not require the construction of replacing housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.
Cumulative Impact
As described above, Population and Housing, the proposed project would result in less-thansignificant impacts related to inducing population growth, displacing housing or displacing people. When added to the cumulative scenario, the proposed project would not contribute incrementally to cumulative impacts related to population and housing. Because the proposed projects would not involve construction or operation of new residences, the proposed projects’ contribution to cumulative impacts to population and housing would not be cumulatively considerable.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 113 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Public Services
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES —
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the following public
services:
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆ ?protection Fire) i
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆ ?protection Police) ii
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆ ?Schools) iii
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆ ?Parks) iv
v) Other public facilities? ܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
a.i) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project area receives fire protection services by the Ventura County Fire Department (VCFD). The VCFD covers an 848- square mile service areas and serves more than 480,000 people in both the City of Thousand Oaks as well as unincorporated parts of Ventura County and other cities within the county (City of Thousand Oaks, 2020a). The proposed project would not result in unplanned growth and is a part of The City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7.
Further, construction jobs would be temporary and workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. Implementation of the proposed project would not induce growth that could result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives of the VCFD. As such, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on fire protection services.
a.ii) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project area receives police protection services by the Ventura County Sherriff’s Department (City of Thousand Oaks, 2020b).
As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in unplanned growth and is a part of The City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7. Further, construction jobs would be temporary and workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. Implementation of the proposed project would not induce growth that could result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives of the Ventura County Sherriff’s Department. As such, the proposed project would have a less-thansignificant impact on police protection services.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 114 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 a.iii) No Impact. The proposed project would not change existing demand for school services, as the proposed project would not result in an increase in population or new housing.
Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to school services. a.iv) No Impact. The proposed project would not result in an increase in population and would not prompt the need for new parks. Construction jobs would be temporary and workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to parks. a.v) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in unplanned growth and is a part of The City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No.
7. Construction jobs would be temporary and workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. Implementation of the proposed project would not induce growth that could result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives of public services within the City of Thousand Oaks for the proposed project area. As such, impacts would less than significant.
Cumulative Impact
As described above, Public Services, implementation of the proposed project would not include development of new housing. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly generate population growth within the proposed project area. As such, the proposed project would not significantly increase the need for fire or police protection services, or increase the usage of schools, libraries, or hospitals, beyond the planned growth identified in the relevant General Plans and Specific Plan No. 7.
When added to the cumulative scenario, the proposed project would not contribute incrementally to significant cumulative impacts related to public services. Because the proposed project would not involve construction or operation of new residences and would not increase the need or usage of public services, the proposed projects’ contribution to cumulative impacts related to public services would not be cumulatively considerable.
References
City of Thousand Oaks. 2020. Fire Department. Available online at:
https://www.toaks.org/departments/fire, accessed on April 1, 2020.
City of Thousand Oaks. 2020b. Police Department. Available online at:
https://www.toaks.org/departments/police, accessed on April 1, 2020.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 115 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Recreation
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVI. RECREATION —
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
܈ ܆ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed project consists of construction of a business park that includes 15 industrial buildings. The project is a part of planned development discussed in the City of Thousand Oaks Specific Plan 7. Construction jobs would be temporary and workers would not be anticipated to relocate their residence to the project area and would not induce substantial population growth or require permanent housing. The proposed project would not result, directly or indirectly, in an unplanned increase in population. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities and would not cause physical deterioration of facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur. b) No Impact. As discussed above, the proposed project would not result, directly or indirectly, in an unplanned increase in population. The proposed project includes an eight-foot multi-use/equestrian easement along the east side of the proposed Academy Drive and an additional three-foot multi-use/equestrian easement along the north side of Conejo Center Drive. This multi-use/equestrian trail will eventually connect to the proposed equestrian trail along Academy Drive west of the proposed project and the COSCA Western Plateau Trail. The proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Cumulative Impact
The proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact on recreational facilities. The project does not include development of new housing and would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed projects’ contribution to cumulative impacts to recreation would not be cumulatively considerable.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 116 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Transportation
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION — Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur if the project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The City’s General Plan Goals and Policies includes a circulation policy of maintaining a Level of Service (LOS) C within the city limits. The policy states: “The City shall maintain a Level of Service C on all roads and at all intersections. Lower levels of service may be tolerated to preserve or enhance landscaping and aesthetic integrity.” As a result, a traffic impact analysis was prepared by Kimley Horn to evaluate the impacts of the proposed project on the local circulation system and the project consistency with the General Plan Goals and Policies. The following analysis is based on the traffic impact analysis prepared by Kimley Horn (Kimley Horn 2020). The Kimley Horn traffic impact analysis can be found in Appendix H of this IS/MND.
The traffic impact analysis studied traffic conditions under the following conditions:
x Existing (2020)
x Existing (2020) + Project
x Buildout (2040)
The year 2020 is the defined year for existing conditions. Traffic volumes for the Existing (2020) conditions were interpolated between the 2016 counts and the approved 2040 volumes found in the Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study (TIMF), completed in 2019. Approved 2040 traffic volumes from the TIMF were used for the Build Out (2040) analysis.
Existing operations and peak-hour project traffic impacts were analyzed at the following four intersections within the vicinity of the project:
x Rancho Conejo Boulevard at Hillcrest Drive/Signalized x Camino Dos Rios/Teller Road at Hillcrest Drive/Signalized Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 117 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 x Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive/Signalized
x Broadbeck at Camino Dos Rios/Signalized
The traffic impact analysis concluded the Existing (2020) conditions, all study intersections operate at an acceptable level of service with the exception of the intersection of Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive during the PM peak hour, which operates at a LOS D.
For the Existing (2020) + Project conditions, the project has a significant impact on the intersections of Rancho Conejo Boulevard at Hillcrest Drive (AM peak hour) and Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive (AM and PM peak hours). To reduce the impact to the above intersections the following actions are required, signal timing changes at both intersections to accommodate the vehicular demand and changing the lane assignment of the southbound approach of the intersection of Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive to be a through, through, through-right approach.
For the Build Out (2040) Condition the above improvements from the Existing (2020) + Project scenario were included in the Build Out (2040) conditions. In the Build Out (2040) scenario, all study intersections continue to operate at an acceptable LOS, except for the intersection of Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive. However, it is anticipated that when the future Academy Drive extension is built and connects to the project site, it would alleviate the traffic experienced on Ventu Park Road and therefore decrease the delay seen at the intersection of Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive.
As a result, compliance with the improvements identified in the traffic impact analysis requiring the implementation of signal timing changes at both the intersections of Rancho Conejo Boulevard at Hillcrest Drive and Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive and the changing of the lane assignment of the southbound approach of the intersection of Ventu Park Road at Hillcrest Drive would reduce the LOS to C or better, making the project consistent with General Plan Goals and Policy. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts.
Generally, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is identified as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the purposes of this discussion, VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel. Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) (regarding roadway capacity for some transportation projects), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.
Per CEQA Guidelines 15064.3 subdivision (b)(1), for land use projects, VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Projects that decrease VMT in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 118 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 A VMT analysis was prepared for the proposed project to evaluate the transportation impacts of the proposed project and the report can be found (Iteris 2020). The VMT analysis used a ODQGဨXVHEDVHGPRGHOthat was developed using the Ventura County Transportation Model (VCTM), which is a subarea model of the Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG) travel demand model. The VCTM is consistent ZLWKWKH6&$*5736&6WUDYHOဨGHPDQGPRGHODVVXPSWLRQVDQGLQSXWVThe project model consists of a 2012 base year scenario and 2040 future year scenario. The 2012 base year of the 2016 model is the region wide standard for existing and baseline conditions analysis. The Iteris VMT analysis can be found in Appendix H of this IS/MND.
The City has adopted an administrative policy stating that thresholds of significance will be determined on a case-by-case basis. For the proposed project, a significant impact would occur if the: VMT per capita or VMT per employee exceeds the citywide average VMT per capita or per employee of the baseline. The Citywide average daily VMT per employee is 14.58 and the proposed projects daily VMT per employee is 16.52. The project daily VMT per employee is 13.3 percent greater than the citywide average. Based on the thresholds of significance, the proposed project would result in a significant transportation impact and the project would need to mitigate its daily VMT per employee to a less than significant level. The 985 project employees are estimated to generate a total 16,275 daily vehicle miles and to be at the citywide average the project employees would need to generate an estimated 14,361 vehicle miles per day—a difference of 1,914 vehicle miles. In order to be mitigated to a less than significant level, the total number of HVWLPDWHGSURMHFWဨUHODWHGYHKLFOHPLOHVZRXOGQHHGWREHUHGXFHGE\ YHKLFOHPLOHV.
However, the implementation of Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 through TRAF-7, ZKLFKZRXOGLQFOXGHERWKRQဨVLWHDQGRIIဨVLWHSK\VLFDOLQIUDVWUXFWXUHLPprovements, would reduce the impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
TRAF-1- The Applicant shall provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site and eliminate physical barriers such as walls, landscaping, and slopes that impede pedestrian circulation.
TRAF-2- The Applicant shall provide bike parking at each building and HQGဨRIဨWULS facilities for bicycle riders including bicycle racks and lockers.
TRAF-3- The Applicant shall build electrical charging infrastructure including solar energy generation and battery storage for a minimum of 51 electrical vehicle charging stations. Charging stations shall be located at each building and the number of stations shall be based a number of parking spaces provided at each building.
TRAF-4- The Applicant shall provide one space per building for preferential parking in convenient locations (such as near public transportation or building front doors) in terms of free or reduced parking fees, priority parking, or reserved parking for commuters who FDUSRROYDQSRROULGHဨVKDUHRUXVHDOWHUQDWLYHO\IXHOHGYHKLFOHV Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 119 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 TRAF-5- The Applicant shall contribute a fair share contribution to the extension of Academy Drive.
TRAF-6- The Applicant shall contribute to the fair contribution to complete the Hill Canyon Wastewater Treatment Plan Access Road.
TRAF-7- The Applicant shall contribute to the fair contribution to complete the new bicycle access from new Hill Canyon Wastewater access road to Hill Canyon Road. c) Less-than-Significant Impact. The project area has been previously graded, and infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks and utilities were installed to prepare for the future development. The proposed project would not include any new roadways beyond what was previously installed. As result, the proposed project would not result in any new roadway features or alignments or otherwise alter the geometric design of an existing roadway. As such, the project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) Less-than-Significant Impact. Refer to response to Issue f), in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section XVII, Transportation, Issue a) and c) above. The proposed project would nominally add vehicles to the local roadway and circulation system. However, no lane or road closures would be required. All project-related activities would occur onsite. The proposed project would not interfere with emergency response access or impact long-term emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant.
Cumulative Impact
The Citywide average daily VMT per employee is 14.58 and the proposed projects daily VMT per employee is 16.52. The project daily VMT per employee is 13.3 percent greater than the citywide average. Based on the thresholds of significance, the proposed project would result in a significant transportation impact and the project would be required to implementation Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 through TRAF-7 to reduce the daily VMT per employee to a less than significant level. Because related projects within the City would also be required to comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts and similar to the proposed project, cumulative projects would have a significant impact if the VMT per capita or VMT per employee exceeds the citywide average VMT per capita or per employee of the baseline. Individual projects would be required to mitigate any significant impact. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to cause incremental impacts to transportation and traffic when considering related past, present, or foreseeable future projects, with the implementation of the Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 through TRAF-7.
References
Iteris 2020. Draft Shapell Industrial Project –CEQA Transportation Analysis. December 21.
Kimley Horn 2020. Shapell Traffic Study. May 15
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 120 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Tribal Cultural Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES —
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope
of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that
is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources. Code Section 5020.1(k), or
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a.i) Less-than-Significant Impact. Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), signed into law on September 25, 2014, requires lead agencies to evaluate a project’s potential to impact Tribal Cultural Resources (TCR) and establishes a formal consultation process for California Native American Tribes as part of CEQA. TCRs includes sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register or included in a local register of historical resources. AB 52 also gives lead agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a TCR.
Consultation is required upon request by a California Native American tribe that has previously requested that the City provide it with notice of such projects, and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project.
The City has received no requests for Tribal Consultation under AB52. a.ii) Less-than-Significant Impact. Under AB 52, if a lead agency determines that a project may cause a substantial adverse change to a TCR, the lead agency must consider measures to mitigate that impact. PRC Section 21074 provides a definition of a TCR. In brief, in order to be considered a TCR, a resource must be either: 1) listed, or determined to be eligible for listing, on the national, State, or local register of historic resources, or 2) a resource that the lead agency chooses, in its discretion supported by substantial evidence, to treat as a TCR. In the latter instance, the lead agency must determine that the resource meets the criteria for listing in the State register of historic resources or County Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 121 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Designated Cultural Resource. In applying those criteria, a lead agency shall consider the value of the resource to the tribe.
As discussed above, The City has received no requests for Tribal Consultation under AB52.
Cumulative Impact
As discussed above, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to tribal cultural resources. Accordingly, the proposed project would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to these types of resources.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 122 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Utilities and Service Systems
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. The lots where the project would be constructed have already been installed with infrastructure such as sidewalks and utilities. However, during construction minor modifications to existing built infrastructure might occur to accommodate project construction. However, the proposed project would not require expanded water (see XIX b, below), electricity, gas or telecommunication services that could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project is a planned development that is a part of the City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7 which is currently designated industrial and institutional. Since the proposed project would exceed the requirements of SB 610, which requires A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area., requires the preparation of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA). A WSA was prepared for the project in December 2020 and concluded that the estimated water demand for the proposed project was included in the Cal-Am Ventura District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) (Appendix I). Additionally, as a result of land use designation changes for portions of the project site that occurred after the adoption of the 2015 UWMP, there was overall reduction in water demand for use. The water demand projections in the Ventura County District 2015 UWMP considered 9.9 acres of the project site to be residential use (“Residential High Density”15-30 du/net acre). That land use designation was changed in Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 123 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 2015 to “Industrial” use. Since the estimated water demand for industrial uses is less than the water demand for residential uses included in the Cal-Am Ventura County District 2015 UWMP estimate, the future water demand for the project was accounted for in the Cal-Am Ventura District 2015 UWMP. As such, the project would have sufficient water supplies for the foreseeable future. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Less-than-Significant Impact. Wastewater generated during construction of the proposed project would be minimal, consisting of portable toilet waste generated by construction workers. Wastewater generated during construction would be collected within portable toilet facilities. All wastewater generated in portable toilets would be collected by a permitted portable toilet waste hauler and appropriately disposed of at an identified liquid-disposal station. Therefore, construction or expansion of water or wastewater facilities would not be required for construction of the proposed project. As discussed above, the proposed project is a planned development that is a part of the City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7. The City of Thousand Oaks currently serves the wastewater needs of project site and would serve the project. Wastewater generated from the project site would be conveyed to the Hill Canyon Treatment Plant. Currently, the Hill Canyon Treatment Plant treats an average of 8.5 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater with the capacity to treat 14 mgd, and therefore has excess capacity of approximately 5.5 mgd. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Less-than-Significant Impact. The waste generated during construction of the proposed project would mainly consist of general construction debris and worker personal waste.
The construction contractor would be required to dispose of solid waste in accordance with local solid waste disposal requirements. In compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 and the California Green Building Code, the proposed project would be required to divert 50 percent of its construction waste from landfills.
The remaining construction solid waste would be taken to a nearby landfill to the project area to be determined by the construction contractor. The closest active landfill to the proposed project would be the Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center, which is located in Simi Valley approximately 20 miles northeast from the proposed project area. Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center has a permitted throughput of 9,250 tons per day, and has a remaining capacity of 88,300,00 cubic yards (CalRecycle, 2020). The landfill’s cease operation date is anticipated to be in the year 2052. Therefore, the landfill would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project’s construction waste disposal needs. Impacts would be less than significant.
The project proposes 83,100 SF of office space and 671,222 SF of space for manufacturing. CalRecycle provides solid waste generation rates that estimate amounts of waste typically created during daily operation of various land uses, including office buildings and warehouse/light manufacturing. CalReycle’s solid waste generation rate for office operations is 6 lbs of waste per 1,000 SF per day, and for manufacturing operations the rate is 1.42 lbs of waste per 100 SF per day (Cal Recycle, 2020b). Thus, solid waste that would be generated during operation of proposed office buildings and manufacturing warehouses would amount to approximately 500 lbs per day and 9,500 lbs per day, Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 124 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 respectively. These amounts would contribute less than 1 percent to Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center’s permitted daily throughput capacity and the proposed project would not otherwise significantly impact the landfill’s remaining operation timeline.
Therefore, impacts related to solid waste generation during operation of the proposed project would be less than significant.
e) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would comply with all federal, state, and local construction requirements during construction of the proposed project.
The proposed project would be required to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 and the California Green Building Code requiring 50 percent diversion of its construction waste from landfills through reuse and recycling. Therefore, project impacts related to potential noncompliance with solid waste statutes and regulations would be considered less than significant.
Cumulative Impact
As discussed above, the proposed project is a planned development that is a part of the City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7. The project would have a less-than-significant impact associated with utilities and service systems. When added to the cumulative scenario, the effects of the proposed project would not contribute incrementally to the cumulative impacts on utilities.
The proposed project is planned development and would result in a less-than-significant impact to utilities without requiring mitigation. Therefore, when considered in addition to the anticipated impacts of other projects in the cumulative scenario, the proposed projects’ incremental contribution to utilities and service systems would not be cumulatively considerable.
References
CalRecycle. 2020. Facility/Site Summary Detail: Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center.
Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/Directory/56-AA-0007, accessed on April 2, 2020.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 125 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Wildfire
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XX. WILDFIRE — If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
܆ ܈ ܆ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in response to Section IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Issue f), implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan because all construction and operational activities would be within the boundaries of an approved Specific Plan. The circulation system has previously been constructed and the road widths and cul-de-sac diameters are in compliance with city code. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project is located is the Local Responsibility Area Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). Construction of the proposed project would involve the use of flammable materials such as fuels used for construction equipment. The use of spark-producing construction machinery within fire risk areas such as the project area could expose temporary project workers and contractors to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire. However, contractors would have to comply with Public Resource Codes (PRC) Sections 4427, 4428, 4431, and 4442. During construction, strict adherence to these PRC sections would ensure that contractors are responsible for all monitoring and safety measures ensuring that any risk to exacerbate wildfire. Furthermore, as described in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure fire hazard reduction measures are implemented during construction activities to further reduce the potential for wildfire impacts on project workers and contractors to a less than significant level.
Once constructed, the project would include 15 industrial buildings. Fire hydrants and utilities already exist on the project site and are currently operational. In addition, the Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 126 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 project would include a fire buffer around the perimeter of the site void of vegetation to protect the structures from fires. Further, all buildings would be required to have a fire suppression system and assessable fire extinguishers in compliance with the California Code of Regulations (CCR) and Cal/OSHA. With adherence to applicable laws and regulations, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure:
Implement Mitigation Measure HAZ-1
c) Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not result in the installation fuel breaks, emergency water sources or new power lines. The proposed project entails the construction of 15 industrial buildings. Infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, fire hydrants and utilities already exist on the project site and would not be required during construction. In addition, the project would include a fire buffer around the perimeter of the site void of vegetation to protect the structures from fires. However, all building activities must comply with fire protection and prevention requirements specified by the CCR and Cal/OSHA. This includes various measures such as easy accessibility of firefighting equipment, proper storage of combustible liquids, no smoking in service and refueling areas, and worker training for firefighter extinguisher use. With adherence to applicable laws and regulations, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. d) Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in Section VII, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity a)(iv) and c), Section IX Hydrology and Water Quality c)(ii), and c)(i), the project would not result in increased drainage or runoff that could contribute to landslide or flooding impacts. Impacts would be less than significant.
Cumulative Impact
As discussed above, the project would be located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Local Responsibility Area and includes Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 to reduce the potential for causing a wildfire during construction. The potential for wildland fires resulting in the loss of life or property is generally unique to each site. All cumulative projects are subject to the fire codes and regulations. The cumulative projects are all located within developed areas, but similar to the project, other cumulative projects would be required to include such features as fuel modification zones, fire access roads, and fire hydrants to reduce the risk of potential wildland fires. As a result, through the project’s compliance Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and with fire codes and regulations, the potential cumulative impacts from wildland fires would be less than significant.
References
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), 2020. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available online at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414, accessed January 2021.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 127 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE —
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
܆ ܆ ܈ ܆
Discussion
a) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Construction of the proposed project has the potential to effect state and federally listed species, as well as nesting and foraging activities for common avian species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6 would ensure that impacts to biological resources are mitigated to a less than significant level.
The proposed project area is considered sensitive for the presence of subsurface archaeological deposits based on proximity to a known prehistoric site within a 0.5-mile radius, and potential underlying paleontological resources based on the underlying geologic formation of the proposed project area. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-5 and GEO-1 through GEO-3 would ensure impacts to archaeological resources and paleontological resources are mitigated to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-6, CR-1 through CR-5, and GEO-1 through GEO-3.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. A cumulative impact could occur if the proposed project would result in an incrementally considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact in consideration of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects for each resource area. No direct significant impacts were identified for the proposed project that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Conejo Summit Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Conejo Summit Project 128 ESA / D201700220.01
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration February 2022 The proposed project is a planned development that is a part of the City of Thousand Oaks’ Specific Plan No. 7. Any project that would be constructed concurrently with the proposed project would be required to mitigate any potential impacts. As a result, implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation of future concurrent projects are expected to reduce impacts to non-significant levels and therefore, would not be cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures:
Implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2, BIO-1 through BIO-6, CR-1 through CR-6, and GEO-1 through GEO-3, HAZ-1, and TRAF-1 through TRAF-7. c) Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Based on the analysis of the project's impacts in the Responses to I thru XX, there is no indication that this project could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. While there would be a variety of effects during construction related to biological resources, cultural and paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials, these impacts would be less than significant based on compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures, where applicable. The project would not have any long-term impacts. With implementation of mitigation measures included in this IS/MND, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse effects to humans, either directly or indirectly.
Mitigation Measures:
Implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2, BIO-1 through BIO-6, CR-1 through CR-6, and GEO-1 through GEO-3, HAZ-1, and TRAF-1 through TRAF-7.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 1/22 Tuesday, January 5, 2021
Regular Board Meeting
Public advisory: The location of the Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education meeting is closed to the public.
DATE: Tuesday, January 5, 2021
4:30 P.M. Closed Session
6:00 P.M. Open Session
Location: 1402 E. Janss Road (Board Room located in CVHS), Thousand Oaks 91362
NOTICE OF TELECONFERENCE OPTIONS FOR MEETING
The Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education regular meeting will be a teleconference meeting where one or more members of the Board will be attending the meeting via teleconference/video conference.
This teleconference is being held in accordance with Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus. This meeting will also be available via live-stream through our website at: http://www.conejousd.org/Board-of-Education/Board-MeetingVideos-Watch-Live As there is a Stay-Safe-At-Home order in place, we understand that it is critically important for people to limit in-person interaction. Education is an essential function, and we value your input.
Therefore, the District is providing appropriate opportunities for public participation.
You may participate in the meeting by submitting your written comment on a topic in lieu of providing a public comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line). To give the District adequate time to provide your comments to the Board of Education, please submit your comments prior to 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (Tuesday, January 5, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting.
In addition to the written comment opportunities described above, the District will also permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you would like to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, extension 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. the day before the meeting (Monday, January 4, 2021).
When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected. Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can be reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed during the Governing Board meeting.
Pursuant to the Executive Order, and in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in the Board of Education meeting, please contact the District at (805) 497-9511, extension 1101, within 48 hours of the meeting.
Please be advised that communications directed to the Board of Education are public records and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and Brown Act unless exempt from disclosure under the applicable law. Communications will NOT be edited for redactions; will be printed/posted as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 2/22 Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion nor can a decision be made in regard to public comments. The Board may provide a reference to staff or other resources of information, request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting, or direct staff to place an item on a future agenda.
PLEASE NOTE: Public comments via telephone will be limited to three minutes. On those occasions where there is an unusually large number of requests to speak, the President of the Board may make the decision to decrease the time for individual speakers and/or the total time.
Please present your comments in a factual, respectful, and dignified manner that models how we expect our children to participate in the democratic process. Know that your comments may be heard by students who are present in this room or students who may watch the broadcast of this meeting.
Thank you!
1. CLOSED SESSION
(On Closed Session agenda items only)
Oral Public Comments
The Board welcomes public comments. Due to Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus, the District will permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, Ext. 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. on the day before the meeting (January 4, 2021).
Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can re reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed. When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected.
If there are numerous persons wishing to make public comments, the President of the Board may decrease the amount of time allotted for each speaker. Please present your comments in a factual and respectful manner. Please be advised that except in limited situations the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion or make a decision in regard to any item not appearing on the agenda. However, the Board or staff may briefly respond to comments or questions from the public; ask clarification questions or make announcements; direct staff to place an item on a future agenda; request staff to report on an issue at a future meeting, or provide reference to staff or otherwise inform members of the public where they can locate additional sources of factual information.
Written Public Comments
If you wish to submit a written comment on a topic in lieu of a public comment, you may provide your written comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (January 5, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting. The information on these cards will be become a part of the public record.
Subject A. Comments - Public
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject B. Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release, Pursuant to Government Code §54957
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 3/22 (Closed Session item only)
(Closed Session Item only)
(Closed Session item only)
2. OPEN SESSION
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Action, Information
Subject C. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation, Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(1), OAH 2020010794
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Action, Information
Goals Goal N/A
Subject D. Labor Negotiations, Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6. The agency negotiator is Jeanne Valentine, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources.
Employee Organization: Unified Association of Conejo Teachers (UACT) Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Information
Subject A. Call the Meeting to Order and Roll Call
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject B. Pledge of Allegiance
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject C. Announcements from Closed Session and Open Session Procedures 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 4/22 Student Reporters - 2020/2021
Century Academy: Ripley Conklin
Conejo Valley High School: Ryan Blourchi
Newbury Park High School: Steven Kitchell
Thousand Oaks High School: Chauncey Walker
Westlake High School: Joey Cacciarelli
Oral Public Comments
The Board welcomes public comments. Due to Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus, the District will permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, Ext. 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. on the day before the meeting (January 4, 2021).
Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can re reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed. When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected.
If there are numerous persons wishing to make public comments, the President of the Board may decrease the amount of time allotted for each speaker. Please present your comments in a factual and respectful manner. Please be advised that except in limited situations the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion or make a decision in regard to any item not appearing on the agenda. However, the Board or staff may briefly respond to comments or questions from the public; ask clarification questions or make announcements; direct staff to place an item on a future agenda; request staff to report on an issue at a future meeting, or provide reference to staff or otherwise inform members of the public where they can locate additional sources of factual information.
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject D. Approval of the Agenda
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject E. Reports from Student Reporters
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Information
Subject F. Comments - Public
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 5/22 Written Public Comments
If you wish to submit a written comment on a topic in lieu of a public comment, you may provide your written comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (January 5, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting. The information on these cards will be become a part of the public record.
Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board of Education cannot enter into formal discussion with individuals making public comments to the Board. The Board cannot take action on any issues raised during public comments that are not on the meeting agenda. Individual Board members may respond to public comments during the Individual Board Member’s Comments section of the agenda.
Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board of Education cannot enter into formal discussion with individuals making public comments to the Board. The Board cannot take action on any issues raised during public comments that are not on the meeting agenda. Individual Board members may respond to public comments during the Individual Board Member’s Comments section of the agenda.
Update on Blended Learning and High School Master Schedules for Returning to Campus:
California Department of Public Health - Schools and School-Based Programs:
https://files.covid19.ca.gov/pdf/guidance-schools.pdf (attached below) What are the criteria for closing a school?
Individual school closure is recommended based on the number of cases, the percentage of the teacher/students/staff that are positive for COVID-19, and following consultation with the Local Health Officer. Individual school closure may be appropriate when there are multiple cases in multiple cohorts at a school or when at least 5 percent of the total number of teachers/student/staff are cases within a 14-day period, depending on the size and physical layout of the school.
The Local Health Officer may also determine school closure is warranted for other reasons, including results from public health investigation or other local epidemiological data.
Subject G. Comments - Board of Education
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject H. Comments - Superintendent
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject I. Discussion/Information - Discussion by Board of Education and Staff on our Elementary and Middle School Blended Program and Information Provided by Staff on our High School Master Schedule, Co-Curriculars, and On-Campus Learning.
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Discussion, Information
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 6/22 What are the criteria for closing a school district?
A superintendent should close a school district if 25% or more of schools in a district have closed due to COVID-19 within 14 days, and in consultation with the local public health department.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/COVID19/Schools%20Reopening%20Recommendations.pdf (attached below) Ventura County Public Health (VCPH) FAQ:
https://vcportal.ventura.org/covid19/docs/FAQ_COVID-19_and_Schools_12-29-2020.pdf The Governor’s Office also provided the following links as resources:
Safe Schools for All Plan Summary
Safe Schools for All Plan Science
Safe School for all Plan Rationale
CVUSD Dashboard Update:
https://www.conejousd.org/
File Attachments
Update on Reopening Schools to BOE 1 5 21 FINAL.pdf (1,023 KB) guidance-schools (1).pdf (882 KB)
Schools Reopening Recommendations.pdf (282 KB)
3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Employment Contract (Extension) for the Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources as the Employee's Current Contract Terms Out June 30,2021? INFORMATION:
The contract includes a three-year term for the period commencing July 1, 2021, and ending June 30, 2024. Subject to the Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources, receiving a satisfactory performance evaluation in 2021-2022, the term of agreement will be extended on year to June 30, 2025. On or before June 30 of each year in the extension period, this contract may be extended for an additional year subject to the Assistant Superintendent receiving a satisfactory performance evaluation.
For 2021-2022 school year, the Assistant Superintendent shall receive an annual salary of $187,647.36 and receive salary increases equal to the percentage salary increases granted to District management personnel. The Assistant Superintendent, shall be provided all health and insurance benefits, which are provided to District certificated staff and/or management personnel. The District shall pay for an ACSA Disability policy annually for each year of the contract NTE $900.00. The District shall pay the Assistant Superintendent’s membership dues for Association of California School Administrators.
Subject A. Review and Action on Employment Contract (Extension) for Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources (Contract Extension - Term Length) Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Action
Recommended Action Approve the Employment Contract (Extension) for the Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources, as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 7/22 The Assistant Superintendent shall be required to provide 220 days of service to the District each year. In the event the Assistant Superintendent is required to work beyond her 220-day work year, she may accumulate “comp time” of up to 11 days which, if she does not use must be paid out at her per diem rate upon her departure from the District. The Assistant Superintendent shall be provided with one day per month sick leave, credited in advance. Earned sick leave may be accrued, accumulated and transferred as provided by the Education Code and Board rules and regulations.
The District shall reimburse the Assistant Superintendent for all actual and necessary expenses incurred and paid by the Assistant Superintendent, in the conduct of her duties on behalf of the District, including travel expenses within the County for use of her private vehicle. The Assistant Superintendent may attend professional meetings at the local, county and state levels. Prior approval of the Superintendent shall be obtained when the Assistant Superintendent attends out-of-state functions, and the District shall pay all actual and necessary expenses of attendance.
The employment contract may be terminated without cause by the Assistant Superintendent or the Board upon the provision of 90-days written notice. If the Board elects to terminate the contract, the Board shall pay the Assistant Superintendent the equivalent of 12 months of her salary.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Total Compensation of Employee (Salary, Health and Welfare, Benefits) as outlined in Contract.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
MWM:sf
File Attachments
Asst. Supt. HR - Amendment 1.pdf (89 KB)
Revised Contract - Asst. Supt. Human Resources.pdf (169 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Employment Contract (Extension) for the Assistant Superintendent, Student Support Services as the Employee's Current Contract Terms Out June 30,2021? INFORMATION:
The contract includes a three-year term for the period commencing July 1, 2021, and ending June 30, 2024. Subject to the Assistant Superintendent, Student Support Services, receiving a satisfactory performance evaluation in 2021-2022, the term of agreement will be extended on year to June 30, 2025. On or before June 30 of each year in the extension period, this contract may be extended for an additional year subject to the Assistant Superintendent receiving a satisfactory performance evaluation.
For 2021-2022 school year, the Assistant Superintendent shall receive an annual salary of $187,647.36 and receive salary increases equal to the percentage salary increases granted to District management personnel. The Assistant Subject B. Review and Action on Employment Contract (Extension) for Assistant Superintendent, Student Support Services (Contract Extension - Term Length) Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Action
Recommended Action Approve the Employment Contract (Extension) for the Assistant Superintendent, Student Support Services, as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 8/22 Superintendent shall be provided all health and insurance benefits, which are provided to District certificated staff and/or management personnel. The District shall pay for an ACSA Disability policy annually for each year of the contract NTE $900.00. The District shall pay the Assistant Superintendent’s membership dues for Association of California School Administrators.
The Assistant Superintendent shall be required to provide 220 days of service to the District each year. In the event the Assistant Superintendent is required to work beyond her 220-day work year, she may accumulate “comp time” of up to 11 days which, if she does not use must be paid out at her per diem rate upon her departure from the District. The Assistant Superintendent shall be provided with one day per month sick leave, credited in advance. Earned sick leave may be accrued, accumulated and transferred as provided by the Education Code and Board rules and regulations.
The District shall reimburse the Assistant Superintendent for all actual and necessary expenses incurred and paid by the Assistant Superintendent, in the conduct of her duties on behalf of the District, including travel expenses within the County for use of her private vehicle. The Assistant Superintendent may attend professional meetings at the local, county and state levels. Prior approval of the Superintendent shall be obtained when the Assistant Superintendent attends out-of-state functions, and the District shall pay all actual and necessary expenses of attendance.
The employment contract may be terminated without cause by the Assistant Superintendent or the Board upon the provision of 90-days written notice. If the Board elects to terminate the contract, the Board shall pay the Assistant Superintendent the equivalent of 12 months of her salary.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Total Compensation of Employee (Salary, Health and Welfare, Benefits) as outlined in Contract.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
MWM:sf
File Attachments
Asst. Supt. SSS - Amendment 1.pdf (89 KB)
Revised Contract - Asst. Supt., Student Support Services.pdf (169 KB)
4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action Items.
Approval of the Minutes:
Regular Meeting of December 1, 2020
Subject A. Board of Education - Approval of Minutes
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent), Minutes
Recommended Action Approve the Board of Education meeting minutes, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 9/22 File Attachments
12.01.20 Board Minutes.pdf (195 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendment of Exhibit A-Designated Positions and Filing Officers of Board Bylaw 9270 - Conflict of Interest, as submitted?
INFORMATION:
An official or employee of a state or local government agency whose position has been designed in the agency's Conflict of Interest code to file statements of economic interest or whose position has not been listed in the code but makes or participates in making governmental decisions must be included in Exhibit A-Designated Positions and Filing Officers of Board Bylaw 9270 - Conflict of Interest. At the previous Board meeting, the Board approved the addition of Exhibit BDisclosure Categories, to Board Bylaw 9270, as requested by the County of Ventura. After submission of the revised Conflict of Interest Bylaw, the District received word back from the counsel of the County of Ventura that a revision of Exhibit A-Designated Positions and Filing Officers, was requested based on the disclosure categories assigned to designated positions. The counsel requested that our district update the assigned disclosure categories based on the six disclosure categories provided by the County of Ventura. Previously, Exhibit A included only two disclosure categories, which differed from the County's six disclosure categories, and was consistent with disclosure categories used by surrounding school districts. This exhibit was also amended to include additional classified and certificated management positions with disclosure requirements that were not considered designated positions in previous years.
A copy of the final amended version of Exhibit B is also attached for reference.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
AMENDED LEGEND:
Black - Existing Verbiage
Bold/Red - Information changed by request of the Ventura County Deputy Clerk of the Board, County of Ventura
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D
Superintendent
MWM:sf
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject B. Board of Education - Approval of Amendment to Exhibit A-Designated Positions and Filing Officers of Board Bylaw 9270 - Conflict of Interest Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Amendment to Exhibit A-Designated Positions and Filing Officers of Board Bylaw 9270 - Conflict of Interest, as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 10/22 File Attachments
BB 9270 - Exhibit A 121520.pdf (147 KB)
BB9270 Exhibit B-final.pdf (180 KB)
1. Certificated Service:
A. Establishment / Modification / Elimination of Positions Order #: No Items
B. New Employment / Assignment Change / Change in Status: Administrators, Regular/Special Education Teachers, School Psychologists
Order #: No Items
2. Certificated Service - Exempt:
A. New Employment / Assignment Change / Change in Status: Exempt Specialists Order #: E20-060-E20-064
3. Classified Service:
A. Establishment / Modification / Elimination of Positions Order #: C20-210
B. New Employment (Prob to Perm) / Assignment Change / Change in Status Orders #: C20-211 - C20-220
C. Substitute / Provisional / Additional Assignment / Change in Status Orders #: C20-221 - C20-226
4. Classified Service - Exempt:
A. Walk-on Coach
Orders #: E20-273 - E20-276
B. Specialist, Proctor, Student Helper, Others
Orders #: E20-277 - E20-280
File Attachments
Certificated PAO's 1.5.21.pdf (145 KB)
1-5-2021 Classified PAOs.pdf (218 KB)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject C. Human Resources - Personnel Assignment Orders Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Personnel Assignment Orders, as submitted.
Goals Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 11/22 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the contracts listed below? INFORMATION:
Education Code 17604 states “wherever in this code the power to contract is invested in the governing board of the school district or any member thereof, the power may by a majority vote of the board be delegated to its district superintendent, or to any persons that he or she may designate, or if there be no district superintendent then to any other officer or employee of the district that the board may designate. The delegation of power may be limited as to time, money or subject matter or may be a blanket authorization in advance of its exercise, all as the governing board may direct. However, no contract made pursuant to the delegation and authorization shall be valid or constitute an enforceable obligation against the district unless and until the same shall have been approved or ratified by the governing board, the approval or ratification to be evidenced by a motion of the board duly passed and adopted.” Therefore, all contracts are presented to the Board of Education for approval. Contracts over $5,000 will be presented individually as a separate Board agenda item.
Company Activity School Amount LCAP Goal
NWEA Subscription Service CVH $2,646.00 1
Trivessa Website Redesign TOH $1,200.00 1
Starfall Educational
Foundation Instructional Software ETS $270.00 1, 4
FISCAL IMPACT:
See above.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Luis Lichtl
Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services
MWM:LL:ab
File Attachments
Contract - NWEA - CVH.pdf (545 KB)
Contract - Trivessa - TOH.pdf (2,020 KB)
Contract - Starfall - ETS.pdf (2,090 KB)
items.
Subject D. Instructional Services - Approval of Contracts Under $5,000 Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the contracts, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject E. Student Services - Approval of Contract with Non-Public School Placement for Student #22-20/21
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 12/22 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve a contract for non-public school placement for Student #22-20/21? INFORMATION:
Special Education classes and services for Student #22-20/21 cannot be met by the District and/or County at this time.
Therefore, in order to provide placement of this student at the recommended educational setting, a contract number must be established for the period of 10/13/2020 through 6/30/2021. The total cost for this non-public school placement is $84,457.08, less reimbursement (from SELPA Mental Health Fund) of $0.00, and less District income of $4,570.80. The total District cost is $79,886.28.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $79,886.28
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve a contract for non-public school placement for Student #22-20/21, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject F. Student Services - Approval of Contract with Haynes Family of Programs, Inc.
DBA: S.T.A.R. Academy
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 13/22 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve a contract with Haynes Family of Programs, Inc. DBA: S.T.A.R. Academy? INFORMATION:
Haynes Family of Programs, Inc. DBA: S.T.A.R. Academy provides academic tutoring services to students in need of additional educational services as recommended by school site and District staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $1,275.00
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
File Attachments
Board- IC Agreement 20-21-signed by STAR 12.02.20_Redacted.pdf (1,429 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Transportation Services Agreement with West Shield Adolescent Services? Recommended Action Approve the contract with Haynes Family of Programs, Inc. DBA: S.T.A.R. Academy, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject G. Student Services - Approval of Contract for the Transportation Services Agreement with West Shield
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Transportation Services Agreement with West Shield, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 14/22 INFORMATION:
This contract will allow West Shield to provide transportation services to CVUSD students on an as-needed basis.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $30,000.00
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
File Attachments
Signed Contract West Shield.pdf (455 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the contract with AMN Healthcare, Inc.? INFORMATION:
The AMN Healthcare, Inc. is an agency that contracts with school districts in Ventura County for the purpose of providing staff for special education related services positions as vacancies arise. Conejo Valley Unified School District's Special Education and Student Support Services Departments will enter into a contract with AMN Healthcare, Inc. to hire temporary staff to fill vacant special education service provider positions, such as speech/language therapist, occupational therapist, psychologist or behaviorist, that are not able to be filled by other CVUSD approved agencies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimated Fiscal Impact is $80,000.00 paid with Special Education funds allocated for the 2020/2021 school year.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject H. Student Services - Approval of Contract with AMN Healthcare, Inc.
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the contract with AMN Healthcare, Inc., as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 15/22 Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Milller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
File Attachments
Signed Conejo Valley UFSD Services Agreement.pdf (618 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the contract with Alba-Walker Life Strategies? INFORMATION:
Alba-Walker Life Strategies is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker Corporation. The presenter, Todd Walker, has 12 years of experience working with children, teens and families with all levels of care. The one-hour virtual workshop discusses Strategies for Supporting LGBTQ+ Students. The presentation is specifically designed to provide parents/guardians with best practices, resources and tools to support the unique mental health needs of their LGBTQ+ children.
FISCAL IMPACT:
BreakThrough Assistance Fund: $200.00
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Shauna Ashmore
Director, Student Support Services
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Milller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject I. Student Services - Approval of Contract - Alba-Walker Life Strategies Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the contract with Alba-Walker Life Strategies, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 16/22 MWM:LAM:SA:kp
File Attachments
CVUSD IC AGREEMENT - Todd Walker[2].pdf (518 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the over $5,000 Purchase Order Report? INFORMATION:
The Board of Education expects that purchase orders exceeding $5,000 will be brought forward for approval. The attached report for the period of December 1, 2020, through December 9, 2020, is presented for approval. Purchase orders have been approved by the department administrator as a necessary expense for the instructional or support program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
General Fund: $428,573.13
Adult Education: $27,265.00
Cafeteria Fund: $95,441.80
Bond Measure I: $48,764.25
Worker Compensation Fund: $41,305.93
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Anthony Frutos, CPPB, CPSM
Director, Purchasing
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:AF:ls
Location Description Location Description Location Description 000 District Office 190 Sequoia 44D Fiscal Services
010 Acacia 195 Sycamore Canyon 45D Technology Services
020 Aspen 200 TOHS 46D Purchasing
030 Banyan 220 University 49D Risk Management
040 Colina 230 Walnut 50D Maintenance & Operations
050 Conejo ES 245 Century Academy 54D Grounds
060 CVHS 24D Special Ed 55D Middle School Instruction
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject J. Business Services - Approval of Purchase Order Report (PO's exceeding $5,000) Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the over $5,000 Purchase Order Report, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 17/22 070 Cypress 250 Weathersfield 56D High School Instruction 080 Glenwood 260 Westlake ES 59D Planning & Facilities
100 Ladera 270 WHS 84D Student Support Services
105 Lang Ranch 280 Westlake Hills BRK BreakThrough
110 Los Cerritos 28D Instructional Services CND Child Nutrition 120 Madrona 290 Wildwood CVAD Conejo Valley Adult Ed
135 EARTHS 29D Elementary Instruction NCS Neighborhood City Center 140 Maple 37D Superintendent PSC Printing Services Center 160 NPHS 41D Personnel TRAN Transportation
17W Park Oaks Central Kitchen 42D Classified Personnel WHNP Central Warehouse 180 Redwood 43D Business Services
File Attachments
PO Board Report 5K+ 1-5-21.pdf (186 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve Change Order 1 to the contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., for the concrete portion of the project at Newbury Park High School?
INFORMATION:
On August 4, 2020, the Conejo Valley Unified School District entered into a contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., for the concrete portion of the project at Newbury Park High School. Details of this change order are attached, and include additional compaction for changes to the concrete portion of the project. The total cost adjustment of this change order is an increase to the original scope of work. Reference purchase order B21-00616.
Original contract amount: $125,000.00
Change order amount: $12,165.33
New contract amount: $137,165.33
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Bond Measure I: $12,165.33
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject K. Business Services - MEASURE I - Change Order 1: New Athletic Field and Parking Lot – Newbury Park High School – Ardalan Construction Company, Inc.
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve Change Order 1 to modify the contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 18/22 MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
File Attachments
10 05 20 - CO1 - Athletic Field - Ardalan.pdf (352 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education authorize the execution and filing of a Notice of Completion for the contracts and projects awarded by the Conejo Valley Unified School District?
INFORMATION:
The Conejo Valley Unified School District entered into contracts, for various projects, that are complete and have been inspected by District staff, as follows:
Site Contract Date Type* Project Description
Major Project #
Purchase
Order Number
Contract Amount
Funding Source
Contractor
Westlake HS October 22, 2020 SS GPS Bipolar Ionization
MP20/21-1000-WHS
B21-00770 $65,205
General Fund Mesa Energy System
Los Cerritos MS October 22, 2020 SS GPS Bipolar Ionization MP20/21-1000-LCR
B21-00770 $25,500
General Fund Mesa Energy System
Sequoia MS October 22, 2020 SS GPS Bipolar Ionization
MP20/21-1000-SEQ
B21-00770 $25,500
General Fund Mesa Energy System
Aspen ES October 22, 2020 SS GPS Bipolar Ionization
MP20/21-1000-ASP
B21-00770 $13,128
General Fund Mesa Energy System
*ITNI: Instructional Technology and Network Infrastructure – MMR: Modernization, Maintenance and Repairs – SMCL: Science, Mathematics Career Preparation Lab – SS: Safety & FISCAL IMPACT:
General Funds: $129,333 (Stimulus)
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject L. Business Services - Notices of Completion
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the execution and filing of a Notice of Completion for the contracts, as listed. 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 19/22 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale or Lease of District-Owned Real Property? INFORMATION:
CVUSD received updates to Board Policies and Administrative Regulations from GAMUT. GAMUT is a policy update service offered through the California School Boards Association (CSBA) which provides information about new laws and court opinions which may affect Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, and Board Bylways.
Board Policy 3280 is amended to reflect new law (820, 2020) which adds, until July 1, 2024, an exception to the requirement that boards appoint an advisory committee for the sale or lease of district-owned property if the property has not operated as an early childhood education facility or for elementary or secondary instruction, and new law (SB 98, 2020) which authorizes, until July 1, 2024, the proceeds from the sale or lease of property purchased entirely with local funds to be used for any one-time general fund purpose if certain conditions are met. The policy also adds material regarding the authorization for boards to meet in closed session with real property negotiations, the requirement to notify the Office of Public School Construction within 90 days if the district sells property that utilized funds received from a state school facilities program within the previous 10 years and the proceeds were not used for purposes, and conditions under which the State Allocation Board may require a return of the funds.
LEGEND:
Black/Bold - new language from GAMUT
Black/Bold/Italics - new language created by CVUSD staff Red - notes provided for information only
Strikeouts - language recommended for removal
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
2020-12-15 BP3280 Sale or Lease of District Property - Proposed.pdf (98 KB) These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject M. Business Services - Approval of Amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale or Lease of District-Owned Real Property
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale of Lease of District-Owned Real Property, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject M. Business Services - Approval of Amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale or Lease pp of District-Owned Real Property
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale of Lease of District-Owned Real Property, as submitted.
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendment to Board Policy 3280 - Sale or Lease of District-Owned Real Property? INFORMATION:
CVUSD received updates to Board Policies and Administrative Regulations from GAMUT. GAMUT is a policy update service offered through the California School Boards Association (CSBA) which provides information about new laws and court opinions which may affect Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, and Board Bylways.
Board Policy 3280 is amended to reflect new law (820, 2020) which adds, until July 1, 2024, an exception to the requirement that boards appoint an advisory committee for the sale or lease of district-owned property if the property has not operated as an early childhood education facility or for elementary or secondary instruction, and new law (SB 98, 2020) which authorizes, until July 1, 2024, the proceeds from the sale or lease of property purchased entirely with local funds to be used for any one-time general fund purpose if certain conditions are met. The policy also adds material regarding the authorization for boards to meet in closed session with real property negotiations, the requirement to notify the Office of Public School Construction within 90 days if the district sells property that utilized funds received from a state school facilities program within the previous 10 years and the proceeds were not used for purposes, and conditions under which the State Allocation Board may require a return of the funds.
File Attachments
2020-12-15 BP3280 Sale or Lease of District Property - Proposed.pdf (98 KB) 10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 20/22 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendment to Board Policy 3530 - Risk Management/Insurance? INFORMATION:
CVUSD received updates to Board Policies and Administrative Regulations from GAMUT. GAMUT is a policy update service offered through the California School Board Association (CSBA) which provides information about new laws and court opinions which may affect Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, and Board Bylaws.
Board Policy 3530 is amended to address the basis upon which insurance decisions should be made and the provisions of safetyrelated training and protective equipment for staff. The policy is also updated to delete material regarding the removal of an insurance agent as being implicit in a governing board's authority and explicit in an insurance contract. The timeline for reporting to the board on risk management activities has been revised from twice a year to periodically to give boards flexibility based on district need.
LEGEND:
Black/Bold - new language from GAMUT
Black/Bold/Italics - new language created by CVUSD staff Red - notes provided for information only
Strikeouts - language recommended for removal
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
2020-12-15 BP3530 Risk Management Insurance - Proposed.pdf (40 KB)
5. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS - GENERAL
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the new Administrative Regulation 3513.1 - Cellular Phone Reimbursement? INFORMATION:
Subject N. Business Services - Approval of Amendment to Board Policy 3530 - Risk Management/Insurance
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the amendment to Board Policy 3530 - Risk Management/Insurance, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject A. Business Services - Approval of New Administrative Regulation 3513.1 - Cellular Phone Reimbursement
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 5. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Information
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 21/22 CVUSD receives updates to Board Policies and Administrative Regulations from GAMUT. GAMUT is a policy update service offered through the California School Boards Association (CSBA), which provides information about new laws and court opinions which may affect Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, and Board Bylaws.
Administrative Regulation 3513.1 is an optional regulation for districts that provide cell phones to their employees. Since the CVUSD provides cell phones to staff, this regulation is deemed necessary.
LEGEND:
Black/Bold - new language from GAMUT
Black/Bold/Italics - new language created by CVUSD staff Red - notes provided for information only
Strikeouts - language recommended for removal
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
2021-01-05 AR3513.1 Cellular Phone Reimbursement - Proposed.pdf (13 KB)
6. ADJOURNMENT
Current Board topics staff are working on and anticipated date(s) to bring information back to the Board:
Scheduled:
Child Care Program Update (1-19-21)
Title IX Coordinators on School Campuses - advertisement and process flow chart (1-19-21) Dates To Be Determined:
Enrollment during/after COVID-19
Governance Handbook
BP 1313 - Civility
Purpose and expectation of District committees
Technology Committee Report
Cell Phones - How each site handles student usage
Bathroom issues at the school sites
Ongoing:
Addition of curriculum/literature written by diverse authors/incorporation of programs and events to include culture Report on activities/events at the sites in relation to acknowledgement of resolutions Subject A. Future Board Topics / Activities
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 6. ADJOURNMENT
Type Information
Subject B. Adjournment
10/8/21, 2:34 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 22/22
FUTURE BOARD MEETINGS
January 19, 2021
4:00 p.m. Discussion Session (CSBA Debrief)
5:00 p.m. Closed Session
6:00 p.m. Open Session
Location: Conejo Valley High School (CVUSD Board Room), 1402 E. Janss Road, Thousand Oaks For a copy of this agenda and additional information, please visit the CVUSD website.
Internet Home Page: www.conejousd.org/
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
In compliance with the ADA, if you need special assistance, including assisted listening devices, to participate in this meeting or other services in conjunction with this meeting, please contact the Superintendent’s Office at (805) 497- 9511 ext. 1101. Upon request, the agenda and documents in this agenda packet can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist our staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
Meeting Jan 5, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 6. ADJOURNMENT
Type Procedural
[LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY]
[LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY]
1 BP 3280
CVUSD
Board Policy
Business and Noninstructional Operations
SaleRU Lease Rf District-Owned Real Property
***Note: The following optional policy and accompanying administrative regulation detail the procedures that govern the district's sale or lease of surplus real property.*** ***Note: Education Code 17455 authorizes the sale, or lease for up to 99 years, of any district real property together with any personal property located thereon without approval of the voters within the district. To do so, the property must not or will not be needed by the district and the district must follow the procedures stated in Education Code 17387-17391.*** ***Note: Pursuant to Education Code 17219, when the district has not used a previously used site for school purposes within the preceding five years, or has not used a newly acquired site within five years of acquisition for any of grades K-8 or seven years of acquisition for any of grades 7-12, the State Allocation Board (SAB) is authorized to charge an "unused site fee" pursuant to Education Code 17219-17224. For further information regarding non-use payments, see the Office of Public School Construction's Unused Site Program Handbook.*** The Governing Board believes that the district facilities and resources should be utilized its facilities and resources in an the most economical and practical manner. To that end, the Superintendent or designee shall periodically study the current and projected use of all district facilities to ensure the efficient utilization of space and for the effective delivery of instruction.
(cf. 1330 - Use of School Facilities)
(cf. 7110 - Facilities Master Plan)
(cf. 7111 - Evaluating Existing Buildings)
(cf. 7160 - Charter School Facilities)
***Note: Pursuant to Education Code 17387-17391, before surplus real property is sold or leased, the Governing Board must appoint an advisory committee to advise the Board on the disposition of such property. Education Code 17388 and 17391 establish exceptions from this requirement. As amended by SB 820 (Ch. 110, Statutes of 2020), Education Code 17391 adds an exception, until July 1, 2024, for the sale or lease of property that has not previously operated, or was not constructed to be operated, as an early childhood education facility or a school for elementary or secondary instruction.***
***Note: Education Code 17389 requires that the advisory committee be representative of specific groups within the community and be composed of not less than seven nor more than 11 members (commonly referred to as a "7-11 committee"). See the accompanying administrative regulation for further information on the composition and duties of this committee.*** 2 Prior to the sale or lease of any surplus real property, Tthe Board shall appoint a district advisory committee prior to the sale or lease of any surplus real property to advise the Board regarding the use or disposition of schools or school building space which is not needed for school purposes. Rentals of surplus property not exceeding 30 days are exempted from this requirement. When the sale, lease, or rental of surplus property is for the purpose of teacher or other employee housing or for the offering of summer school by a private educational institution, tThe Board may elect not to appoint a district advisory committee for any of the following: (Education Code 17388,7-17391)
1. A rental of property for a period of time not exceeding 30 days
2. A lease or rental of surplus property to a private educational institution for the purpose of offering summer school
3. A sale, lease, or rental of surplus property to be used for teacher or other employee housing
4. Until July 1, 2024, a sale or lease of surplus property that has not previously operated, or was not constructed to be operated, as an early childhood education facility or a school for elementary or secondary instruction
(cf. 1220 - Citizen Advisory Committees)
***Note: Pursuant to Government Code 65402, if the county or city has adopted a general plan which is applicable in the area where the district property is located, the district must notify the county or city planning agency of the location, purpose, and extent of the proposed disposition of district property so that the agency can determine and report on the extent to which the disposition conforms with the local planning agency's general plan. The planning agency has 40 days during which it may raise objections. If objections are not raised within 40 days, the lack of response is deemed to be a finding that the district's proposed disposition of the property is in conformity with the local planning agency's adopted general plan.*** If In addition, to ensure that the proposed disposition of the property conforms with any general plan adopted by the local planning agency has adopted a general plan that affects or includes the area where the surplus property is located, the Board shall submit a report to the local planning agency describing the location of the surplus property and the purpose and extent of the proposed sale or lease. (Government Code 65402)
***Note: When proposing the sale or lease of surplus property, the district must also comply with Public Resources Code 21000-21177 (the California Environmental Quality Act) (CEQA), when applicable. Pursuant to 14 CCR 15061, the sale or lease of property is exempt from detailed CEQA review if there is no possibility that the sale or lease will have a significant environmental effect. In such cases, the district must adopt a notice of exemption in accordance with 14 CCR 14062.***
The Board shall determine whether the sale or lease of the surplus property is subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act. (Public Resources Code 21000-21177; 14 CCR 15061-15062)
3 ***Note: Pursuant to Government Code 54956.8, the Board may hold a closed session for real property negotiations, including the sale or lease of property by the district. An Attorney General opinion (94 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 82 (2011)) has concluded that only three subjects related to real property negotiations may be considered in closed session: (1) the amount of consideration the local agency is willing to pay or accept in exchange for the real property rights to be acquired or transferred; (2) the form, manner, and timing of how that consideration will be paid; and (3) items that are essential to arriving at the authorized price and payment terms. See BB 9321 - Closed Session.***
The Board may meet in closed session with its real property negotiator prior to the sale or lease of real property by the district in order to grant its negotiator authority regarding the minimum price or rent and terms of the sale or lease. (Government Code 54956.8) (cf. 9321 - Closed Session)
***Note: When a district is selling any surplus property or leasing it with an option to purchase, Education Code 17464 lists the public entities that must be given priority to lease or purchase the property and the types of notice that the district must provide such entities before disposing of the property. Under certain circumstances, districts may also need to comply with the Naylor Act (Education Code 17485-17500), which requires that priority be given to public agencies when disposing of any district property that includes a playground, playing field, or land with an outdoor recreational purpose. Under certain conditions, the district may grant priority to licensed child care providers pursuant to Education Code 17458 or may sell surplus property for less than fair market value to public entities for recreational purposes pursuant to Education Code 17230.***
When selling or leasing district real property, the Board shall comply with the priorities and applicable procedures and give priority to specified public agencies as required by in applicable law. (Education Code 17230, 17464, 17485-17499; Government Code 54222) (cf. 5148 - Child Care and Development)
(cf. 5148.2 - Before/After School Programs)
(cf. 5148.3 - Preschool/Early Childhood Education)
In addition, when selling real property purchased, constructed, or modernized with funds received within the past 10 years from a state school facilities funding program, the Board shall consider whether any of the proceeds from the sale will need to be returned to the State Allocation Board (SAB) pursuant to Education Code 17462.3.
Resolution of Intention to Sell or Lease
Before ordering the sale or lease of any real property, the Board shall adopt a resolution by a two-thirds vote of all of its members at a regularly scheduled open meeting. The resolution shall describe the property proposed to be sold or leased in such a manner as to identify it, specify the minimum price or rent, describe the terms upon which it will be sold or leased, and specify the commission or rate, if any, which the Board will pay to a licensed real estate broker out of the minimum price or rent. The resolution shall fix a time, not less than three weeks thereafter, for a public meeting, held at the Board's regular meeting place, at which sealed proposals to purchase or lease will be received and considered. (Education Code 17466) 4 (cf. 9320 - Meetings and Notices)
(cf. 9323.2 - Actions by the Board)
The Superintendent or designee shall provide notice of the adoption of the resolution and of the time and place of the meeting that will be held to consider bids by posting copies of the resolution, signed by the Board, in three public places not less than 15 days before the date of the meeting. In addition, the notice shall be published at least once a week for three successive weeks before the meeting, in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county in which the district is located, if such a newspaper exists. (Education Code 17466) ***Note: Education Code 17470 requires districts to take reasonable steps to notify the former owner of the property of the public meeting at which bids will be considered. However, the Board is not required to accord the former owner the right to purchase the property at the tentatively accepted highest bid price nor to offer to sell the property to the former owner at the tentatively accepted highest bid price.***
In accordance with the Education Code 17470, At least 60 days prior to the public meeting, the Superintendent or designee shall take reasonable steps to provide written notification of the public meeting, by certified mail, to the former owners of from whom the district acquired the property of the district’s intent to sell it. (Education Code 17470) Acceptance/Rejection of Bids
At the public meeting specified in the resolution of intention to sell or lease property, the Board shall open, examine, and declare all sealed bids. Before accepting a written proposal, the Board shall call for oral bids in accordance with law. (Education Code 17472, 17473) The Board may reject any and all bids, either written or oral, and withdraw the properties from sale when the Board determines that rejection is in the best public interest. If no proposals are submitted or the submitted proposals do not conform to all the terms and conditions specified in the resolution of intention to lease, the Board may lease the property in accordance with Education Code 17477. (Education Code 17476, 17477)
Of the proposals submitted by responsible bidders which conform to all terms and conditions specified in the resolution of intention to sell or lease, the Board shall finally accept the highest bid after deducting the commission, if any, to be paid to a licensed real estate broker, unless the Board accepts a higher oral bid or rejects all bids. (Education Code 17472) The final acceptance of the bid may be made either at the same meeting specified in the resolution or at any adjourned/continued meeting held within 10 days. Upon acceptance of the bid, the Board may adopt a resolution of acceptance that directs the Board president, or any other Board member, to execute the deed or lease and to deliver the document upon performance and compliance by the successful bidder of all of the terms and conditions of the contract. (Education Code 17475-17478)
(cf. 1431 - Waivers)
Use of Proceeds
5 ***Note: Pursuant to Education Code 17462, the proceeds derived from the sale of surplus property or lease with an option to purchase must generally be used for one-time expenditures for capital outlay or maintenance, with specified exceptions. The law does not place limitations on the use of proceeds for a lease of surplus property that does not include an option to purchase.***
The Superintendent or designee shall ensure that the proceeds from the sale or lease with an option to purchase of surplus district property are used for one-time expenditures and not for ongoing expenditures such as salaries and general operating expenses. (Education Code 17462, 2 CCR 1700)
Proceeds from a sale of surplus district property shall generally be used for capital outlay or maintenance costs that the Board determines will not recur within a five-year period.
Proceeds from a lease of district property with an option to purchase may be deposited into a restricted fund for the routine repair of district facilities, as defined by the SAB, for up to a five-year period. (Education Code 17462)
***Note: Pursuant to Education Code 17462, proceeds from the sale or lease with an option to purchase may be deposited in the district's general fund when the Board and SAB determine that the district has no anticipated need for additional sites or building construction for the next 10 years and no major deferred maintenance requirements. Thus, districts may not apply to the state for new construction or modernization funding during that time period unless certain conditions specified in Education Code 17462 are satisfied.*** However, Iif the Board and SAB determine that the district has no anticipated need for additional sites or building construction for the next 10 years and no major deferred maintenance requirements, the proceeds from the sale or lease with an option to purchase may be deposited in a special reserve fund for the future maintenance and renovation of school sites or in the district’s general fund. Proceeds from the sale or lease with option to purchase of district property may also be deposited in a special reserve fund for capital outlay or maintenance costs of district property that the Board determines will not recur within a five-year period. (Education Code 17462)
(cf. 3100 - Budget)
(cf. 3460 - Financial Reports and Accountability)
***Note: Until July 1, 2024, Education Code 17463.7, as added by SB 98 (Ch. 24, Statutes of 2020), authorizes the proceeds from the sale or lease of property purchased entirely with local funds to be used for any general fund purpose.***
In addition, until July 1, 2024, if district surplus property was purchased entirely with local funds, the proceeds from the sale or lease of the property, together with any personal property located on the property, may be deposited into the general fund of the district and may be used for any one-time general fund purpose. Before exercising this authority, the Board shall: (Education Code 17463.7)
1. Submit to SAB documents certifying that the sale of real property does not violate the provisions of a local bond act and the real property is not suitable to meet projected school construction needs for the next 10 years
6 2. At a public meeting, adopt a plan for expending one-time resources from the sale or lease of the property which identifies the source and intended use of the surplus property proceeds and describes the reasons that the expenditure will not result in ongoing fiscal obligations for the district
***Note: Pursuant to Education Code 17462.3, if the district is selling real property purchased, improved, or modernized with funds received from a state school facilities funding program within the previous 10 years, the district is required to return those funds to SAB under specified conditions. The district must notify OPSC of the sale by submitting Form SAB 308, available on OPSC's web site.***
Whenever the district sells real property that was purchased, improved, or modernized with funds that were received from a state school facilities funding program within the previous 10 years, the district shall notify OPSC within 90 calendar days of the sale of the property if the proceeds from the sale are not used for capital outlay and the property is not sold to a charter school, another school district, a county office of education, or an agency that will use the property exclusively for the delivery of child care and development services. If SAB subsequently makes a finding that the sale is subject to Education Code 17462.3, the district shall return the funds to the SAB within 90 calendar days of the finding. (2 CCR 1702)
Legal Reference:
EDUCATION
CODE
17219-17224 Acquisition of property not utilized as school site; nonuse payments; exemptions 17230-17234 Surplus property
17385 Conveyances to and from school districts
17387-17391 Advisory committees for use of excess school facilities 17400-17429 Leasing property
17430-17447 Leasing facilities
17453 Lease of surplus district property
17455-17484 Sale or lease of real property, especially:
17462.3 State Allocation Board program to reclaim funds 17485-17500 Surplus school playground (Naylor Act)
17515-17526 Joint occupancy
17527-17535 Joint use of district facilities
33050 Request for waiver
38130-38139 Civic Center Act
GOVERNMENT CODE
50001-50002 Definitions
54220-54232 Surplus land, especially:
54222 Offer to sell or lease property
54950-54963 Brown Act, especially:
54952 Legislative body, definition
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
21000-21177 California Environmental Quality Act
CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2
1700-1702 Definitions related to sSurplus property; use of proceeds 7 COURT DECISIONS
San Lorenzo Valley Community Advocates for Responsible Education v. San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District, (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1356
ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS
94 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 82 (2011)
Management Resources:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PUBLICATIONS
Closing a School Best Practices Guide
OFFICE OF PUBLIC SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION PUBLICATIONS
Unused Site Program Handbook, December 2015
WEB SITES
CSBA: http://www.csba.org
California Department of Education, School Facilities Planning Division:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa
Coalition for Adequate School Housing: http://www.cashnet.org Office of Public School Construction: http://www.dgs.ca.gov/opsc CSBA: (3/88 9/90 11/06 10/17) 10/20
CVUSD: (8/08 1/18) 1/2
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 1/31 Tuesday, January 26, 2021
Regular Board Meeting
Public advisory: The location of the Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education meeting is closed to the public.
DATE: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 (rescheduled from January 19, 2021) 4:30 P.M. Closed Session
6:00 P.M. Open Session
Location: 1402 E. Janss Road (Board Room located in CVHS), Thousand Oaks 91362
NOTICE OF TELECONFERENCE OPTIONS FOR MEETING
The Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education regular meeting will be a teleconference meeting where one or more members of the Board will be attending the meeting via teleconference/video conference.
This teleconference is being held in accordance with Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus. This meeting will also be available via live-stream through our website at: http://www.conejousd.org/Board-of-Education/Board-MeetingVideos-Watch-Live As there is a Stay-Safe-At-Home order in place, we understand that it is critically important for people to limit in-person interaction. Education is an essential function, and we value your input.
Therefore, the District is providing appropriate opportunities for public participation.
You may participate in the meeting by submitting your written comment on a topic in lieu of providing a public comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line). To give the District adequate time to provide your comments to the Board of Education, please submit your comments prior to 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (Tuesday, January 26, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting.
In addition to the written comment opportunities described above, the District will also permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you would like to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, extension 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. the day before the meeting (Monday, January 25, 2021).
When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected. Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can be reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed during the Governing Board meeting.
Pursuant to the Executive Order, and in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in the Board of Education meeting, please contact the District at (805) 497-9511, extension 1101, within 48 hours of the meeting.
Please be advised that communications directed to the Board of Education are public records and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and Brown Act unless exempt from disclosure under the applicable law. Communications will NOT be edited for redactions; will be printed/posted as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 2/31 Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion nor can a decision be made in regard to public comments. The Board may provide a reference to staff or other resources of information, request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting, or direct staff to place an item on a future agenda.
PLEASE NOTE: Public comments via telephone will be limited to three minutes. On those occasions where there is an unusually large number of requests to speak, the President of the Board may make the decision to decrease the time for individual speakers and/or the total time.
Please present your comments in a factual, respectful, and dignified manner that models how we expect our children to participate in the democratic process. Know that your comments may be heard by students who are present in this room or students who may watch the broadcast of this meeting.
Thank you!
1. CLOSED SESSION
(On Closed Session agenda items only)
Oral Public Comments
The Board welcomes public comments. Due to Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus, the District will permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, Ext. 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. on the day before the meeting (January 25, 2021).
Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can re reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed. When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected.
If there are numerous persons wishing to make public comments, the President of the Board may decrease the amount of time allotted for each speaker. Please present your comments in a factual and respectful manner. Please be advised that except in limited situations the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion or make a decision in regard to any item not appearing on the agenda. However, the Board or staff may briefly respond to comments or questions from the public; ask clarification questions or make announcements; direct staff to place an item on a future agenda; request staff to report on an issue at a future meeting, or provide reference to staff or otherwise inform members of the public where they can locate additional sources of factual information.
Written Public Comments
If you wish to submit a written comment on a topic in lieu of a public comment, you may provide your written comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (January 26, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting. The information on these cards will be become a part of the public record.
Subject A. Comments - Public
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject B. Conference with Real Property Negotiators, Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8. The agency negotiator is Dr. Victor Hayek, Deputy Superintendent. Price and terms regarding 2498 Conejo Center Drive, Newbury Park, California.
Negotiating party: Perspective Law Group, P.C. on behalf of ARC Investment Group LLC
Subject B. Conference with Real Propy g , § erty Negotiators, Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8. The agency negotiator is Dr. Victor Hayek, Deputy Superintendent. Price g y g y , py p and terms regg j , y, arding 2498 Conejo Center Drive, Newbury Park, California.
Negotiating party: Perspective Law Group, P.C. on behalf of ARC Investment Group g LLC
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 3/31 (Closed Session item only)
2. OPEN SESSION
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type
Subject C. Labor Negotiations, Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6. The agency negotiator is Jeanne Valentine, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources.
Employee Organization: Unified Association of Conejo Teachers (UACT) Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Information
Subject D. Conference with Real Property Negotiators, Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8. The agency negotiator is Dr. Victor Hayek, Deputy Superintendent. The discussion item is price and terms of payment regarding 1335 Calle Bouganvilla, Thousand Oaks, California 91360. Negotiating Parties: Conejo Valley Unified School District; BRIDGES Charter School
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type Information
Subject A. Call the Meeting to Order and Roll Call
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject B. Pledge of Allegiance
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject C. Announcements from Closed Session and Open Session Procedures Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 1. CLOSED SESSION
Type
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 4/31 Oral Public Comments
The Board welcomes public comments. Due to Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-33-20 and N-29-20 respectively in regards to the COVID-19 virus, the District will permit members of the public to address the Board via telephone. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please advise the District by submitting your request to speak via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) or by calling the Superintendent's Office at (805) 497-9511, Ext. 1101, by no later than 5:00 p.m. on the day before the meeting (January 25, 2021).
Members of the public will be required to provide the District with the telephone number where they can re reached to address the Governing Board when the item is being discussed. When participating via teleconference, please remember that you are participating in an official meeting of the District's Governing Board. Disruptive individuals will be disconnected.
If there are numerous persons wishing to make public comments, the President of the Board may decrease the amount of time allotted for each speaker. Please present your comments in a factual and respectful manner. Please be advised that except in limited situations the Board cannot enter into a formal discussion or make a decision in regard to any item not appearing on the agenda. However, the Board or staff may briefly respond to comments or questions from the public; ask clarification questions or make announcements; direct staff to place an item on a future agenda; request staff to report on an issue at a future meeting, or provide reference to staff or otherwise inform members of the public where they can locate additional sources of factual information.
Written Public Comments
If you wish to submit a written comment on a topic in lieu of a public comment, you may provide your written comment via email to [email protected] (please indicate the agenda number in the subject line) by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting (January 26, 2021). Board members will review these written comments prior to the Board meeting. The information on these cards will be become a part of the public record.
Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board of Education cannot enter into formal discussion with individuals making public comments to the Board. The Board cannot take action on any issues raised during public comments that are not on the meeting Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject D. Approval of the Agenda
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject E. Comments - Public
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject F. Comments - Board of Education
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 5/31 agenda. Individual Board members may respond to public comments during the Individual Board Member’s Comments section of the agenda.
Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board of Education cannot enter into formal discussion with individuals making public comments to the Board. The Board cannot take action on any issues raised during public comments that are not on the meeting agenda. Individual Board members may respond to public comments during the Individual Board Member’s Comments section of the agenda.
The District received updated guidance from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). You can view this guidance at the following link:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/COVID19/Consolidated_Schools_Guidance.pdf File Attachments
Board Presentation - California Department of Public Health (CDPH)-final.pdf (245 KB) Blueprint Metrics by Zip Code_Week Ending January 16th.pdf (111 KB) File Attachments
CC for BOE II.pdf (79 KB)
3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Subject G. Comments - Superintendent
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Procedural
Subject H. Discussion on CDPH January 14, 2021 Reopening Guidance Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Discussion, Information
Subject I. Business Services - Child Care Program Discussion Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 2. OPEN SESSION
Type Discussion, Information
Subject A. Instructional Services - Health Education Material Selection and Adoption Timeline
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 6/31 ISSUE:
Instructional Services seeks Board approval as delineated within the information provided.
INFORMATION:
Instructional Services recommends that the Board approve the following curriculums for staff consideration of potential pilot and future adoption:
- Positive Prevention Plus
- Rights Respect Responsibility
- Teen Talk
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A pending adoption decision, information provided within presentation slides Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Luis Lichtl
Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services
MWM:LL:ab
File Attachments
CHYA Update to BOE 1-26-21.pdf (1,037 KB)
Type Action
Recommended Action Approve Instructional Services recommendation, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) Subject B. Adoption of Resolution #20/21-17 for National Black History Month Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Action
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 7/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education adopt a resolution declaring February 2021 as National Black History Month in the Conejo Valley Unified School District?
INFORMATION:
National Black History Month is a time to celebrate and commemorate the roles African Americans have made in the history of our country; and to also acknowledge that African Americans have contributed economically, culturally, and socially to the development of United States history.
Conejo Valley Unified School District is committed to honoring and valuing the legacy, experiences, and contributions of African Americans, not just during February but yearlong.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Jointly prepared by,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D., Assistant Superintendent, Student Services and Luis Lichtl, Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services MWM:LAM:LL:kp
File Attachments
National Black History Month Resolution 2021.pdf (122 KB) Recommended Action Adopt Resolution #20/21-17 for National Black History Month, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) Goal 3: Provide communication and targeted outreach that informs the community of programs & opportunities that support positive student outcomes. (Community Focused) Subject C. Human Resources - Resolution #20/21-12: National School Counseling Week - February 1-5, 2021
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Action
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 8/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education adopt a resolution declaring February 1-5, 2021, as National School Counseling Week? BACKGROUND:
Districts are encouraged to adopt Board resolutions commending the School Counselors and to publicize the role of School Counselors in the educational process. School Counselors continue to reduce barriers to learning and provide the support necessary for all students to achieve at the highest level possible.
RATIONALE:
It is appropriate that the Board of Education recognize and express their appreciation for School Counselors for the hard work and dedication of these individuals for students, schools, and the community. This resolution should be shared with each school and worksite to honor School Counselors for the tremendous impact they can have in helping students achieve school success.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Jeanne Valentine
Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
MWM:JV:sam
File Attachments
Resolution 20.21.12 Natl School Counseling Week (1).pdf (200 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Conejo Valley Unified School District Board of Education member assignments to Advisory Committees for 2021?
BACKGROUND:
Upon the Board's annual reorganizational meeting, their advisory committees are reviewed and any requests for changes in assignments are discussed. The attached Board Advisory Committees list has been updated to reflect the Board's discussion on it during their meeting on December 15, 2020.
Recommended Action Adopt Resolution #20/21-12 declaring February 1-5, 2021, as "National School Counseling Week."
Goals Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) Subject D. Board of Education - Update and Consideration of School Board Member Assignments to Committees
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 3. ACTION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Action, Procedural
Recommended Action Approve the School Board Member Assignments to Committees, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 9/31 RATIONALE:
This review and approval is procedural.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Jenny Fitzgerald
President, CVUSD Board of Education
MWM:JF:sf
File Attachments
Board Committee Assignments - 2021.pdf (48 KB)
4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action Items.
Approval of the Minutes:
Regular Meeting of December 15, 2020
File Attachments
12.15.20 Board Minutes.pdf (128 KB)
1. Certificated Service:
Subject A. Board of Education - Approval of Minutes
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent), Minutes
Recommended Action Approve the Board of Education meeting minutes, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject B. Human Resources - Personnel Assignment Orders Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Personnel Assignment Orders, as submitted.
Goals Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 10/31 A. Establishment / Modification / Elimination of Positions Order #: No Items
B. New Employment / Assignment Change / Change in Status: Administrators, Regular/Special Education Teachers, School Psychologists
Order #: R20-214 - R20-221
2. Certificated Service - Exempt:
A. New Employment / Assignment Change / Change in Status: Exempt Specialists Order #: E20-065-E20-067
3. Classified Service:
A. Establishment / Modification / Elimination of Positions Order #: No Items
B. New Employment (Prob to Perm) / Assignment Change / Change in Status Orders #: C20-237 - C20-248
C. Substitute / Provisional / Additional Assignment / Change in Status Orders #: C20-249
4. Classified Service - Exempt:
A. Walk-on Coach
Orders #: E20-281 - E20-282
B. Specialist, Proctor, Student Helper, Others
Orders #: E20-283
File Attachments
Certificated PAO's 1.26.21.pdf (197 KB)
Classified PAO's 1.26.21.pdf (202 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve an agreement for Student Field Placement in School Counseling with the University of Southern California/USC Rossier School of Education?
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject C. Human Resources - Approval of Student Field Placement Agreement with University of Southern California on behalf of USC Rossier School of Education Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the agreement with the University of Southern California/USC Rossier School of Education for a Student Field Placement in School Counseling, as submitted.
Goals Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 11/31 INFORMATION:
The University of Southern California on behalf of its USC Rossier School of Education has established an approved program of special training to provide counseling experience through supervised counseling to students enrolled in teacher training curricula. This program requires supervision and facilities where students can obtain the clinical learning experience required in the curriculum. The District has the clinical setting, supervision, and equipment needed by USC/Rossier trainees as part of their practical learning experience.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Jeanne Valentine
Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
MWM:JV:sm
File Attachments
USC.Rossier School Counseling SFPA 1.1.21-6.30.22.pdf (301 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve an agreement for Student Field Placement in Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology with California State University, Northridge? INFORMATION:
Conejo Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) is partnering with California State University, Northridge (CSUN) to provide Speech-Language Pathology Graduate Students unpaid internships. Intern candidates, under the direct supervision of CVUSD’s Speech/Language Pathologists, will obtain clinical education experience related to the diagnostic and treatment of students who may or may not exhibit communicative disorders.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject D. Human Resources - Approval of Student Field Placement Agreement with California State University, Northridge for SLPA/Communication Disorders Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Student Field Placement Agreement with California State University, Northridge for SLPA/Communication Disorders, as submitted.
Goals Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 12/31 FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Jeanne Valentine
Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
MWM:JV:sm
File Attachments
CSUN SLPA - 1 Yr Agreement COVID-19.pdf (227 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education reauthorize the following booster club as a parent support/booster organization? TOH Cheer
INFORMATION:
Board Policy 1230 requires annual Board approval for parent support/booster organizations desiring to raise money to benefit the students of any school or program. The policy requires applicants to provide specific information including, but not limited to, current financial documents. It is expected that booster organizations comply with the California Education Code prohibiting pupil fees for participation in educational activities, which includes extra-curricular activities. This booster club has submitted the required information to the Superintendent’s designee for consideration of the Board.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject E. Instructional Services - Parent Support/Booster Organization Reauthorization Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Authorize the referenced booster club to function as a Board-approved parent support/booster organization from January 20, 2021, to November 1, 2021, as submitted.
Goals Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) Goal 3: Provide communication and targeted outreach that informs the community of programs & opportunities that support positive student outcomes. (Community Focused) 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 13/31 Presented by,
Luis Lichtl
Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services
MWM:LL:ab
File Attachments
TOH Cheer Financials.pdf (174 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve a contract for residential treatment center placement for Student #24-20/21? INFORMATION:
Special Education classes and services for Student #24-20/21 cannot be met by the District and/or County at this time.
Therefore, in order to provide placement of this student at the recommended educational setting, a contract number must be established for the period of 10/29/2020 through 6/30/2021. The total cost for this residential treatment center placement is $118,665.00, less reimbursement (from SELPA Mental Health Fund) of $92,855.00, and less District income of $4,248.50. The total District cost is $21,561.50.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $21,561.50.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject F. Student Services - Contract for Residential Treatment Center Placement for Student #24-20/21
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve a contract for residential treatment center placement for Student #24-20/21, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 14/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve a contract for non-public school placement for Student #23-20/21? INFORMATION:
Special Education classes and services for Student #23-20/21 cannot be met by the District and/or County at this time.
Therefore, in order to provide placement of this student at the recommended educational setting, a contract number must be established for the period of 12/03/2020 through 06/30/2021. The total cost for this non-public school placement is $63,866.68, less reimbursement (from SELPA Mental Health Fund) of $0.00, and less District income of $3,691.80. The total District cost is $60,174.88.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $60,174.88
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject G. Student Services - Contract for Non-Public School Placement for Student #23- 20/21
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve a contract for non-public school placement for Student #23-20/21, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject H. Student Services - Approval of Contract - A.M.P. Autism, Inc. - Tamar Apelian Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 15/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve a contract with A.M.P. Autism, Inc.-Tamar Apelian? INFORMATION:
This contract will allow A.M.P. Autism, Inc.-Tamar Apelian to provide assessment and support services to a student enrolled in our District.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Special Education Fund: $5,000.00.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Erika Johnson
Director, Special Education
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:EJ:ks
File Attachments
Conejo USD Contract.pdf (4,554 KB)
ISSUE:
Recommended Action Approve the contract with A.M.P. Autism, Inc.-Tamar Apelian, as submitted.
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject I. Student Services - Approval of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for training with Ventura County Office of Education
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for training with Ventura County Office of Education, as submitted.
Goals Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 16/31 Should the Board of Education approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for training with Ventura County Office of Education?
INFORMATION:
Ventura County Office of Education will provide monthly targeted training to the ELD Advisors on Integrated and Designated ELD instructional practice across grades K-12. The ELD Advisors will take the new learning to their respective school sites and share the new learning with their school site colleagues.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$10,205.00 funded from the Title III Limited English Proficient Program.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Deborah Martinez, Ed.D.
Coordinator, English Learner Services
On behalf of,
Lisa A. Miller, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Student Services
MWM:LAM:DM:ia
File Attachments
VCOE ELD Advisor Training MOU.pdf (53 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Transfer of Funds Summary(s) for the month of December 2020? INFORMATION:
Transfers within the budget are necessary as District operations and demands change. Appropriations, expenditures, revenues, and carryover funds are moved within the budget and may affect fund balance. The Transfer of Funds Summary(s) includes total funds moved within the General Fund for the period of December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject J. Business Services - Approval of Transfer of Funds - December 2020 Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the Transfer of Funds Summary for December 2020, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 17/31 Change in Fund Balance: $0
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Susan Tucker
Director, Fiscal Services
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:ST:mn
File Attachments
Transfer of Funds - December 2020.pdf (123 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the ratification of the warrant lists for December 2020? INFORMATION:
The warrant summary for December includes warrants paid for the period of December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. Expenditures outlined in the attachments are in accordance with the 2020/2021 Budget Parameters. Expenses recorded for each fund will increase by the dollar amount listed, including payroll reports.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As per the attached reports.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Susan Tucker
Director, Fiscal Services
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:ST:mn
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject K. Business Services - Ratification of Warrants - December 2020 Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the ratification of the warrant lists for December 2020, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 18/31 File Attachments
Payroll Class-Cert - December 2020.pdf (57 KB)
Warrants List - December 2020.pdf (485 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education accept the donations and gifts as listed on the December 1 to December 31, 2020, gift and donation report?
INFORMATION:
In accordance with Conejo Valley Unified School District Board Policy 3290, gifts to the District must be approved and accepted by the Board of Education. The Conejo Valley Unified School District is grateful for the community support and appreciates each donation. The District thanks the community for the continued support of our schools! FISCAL IMPACT:
Total deposited to the General Fund on this report: $19,198.50 Total deposited to the General Fund for 2020-21: $248,639.68 Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
2020-2021 Gifts Log - December 2020.pdf (104 KB)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject L. Business Services - Acceptance of Donations/Gifts Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Accept the donations/gifts, intended location and purpose, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject M. Business Services - Ratification of Workers' Compensation Claims (under $50,000)
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 19/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the Workers' Compensation claims for December 2020? INFORMATION:
The District Workers' Compensation insurance plan is a self-insured plan run by the District. When losses occur, the District's thirdparty administrator handles the claims. Cases are reviewed, assessed and brought forward for settlement based on the recommendation of our Director of Safety and Risk Management, our third-party administrator, and (when applicable) the attorney representing the District.
As per Board Policy 3320 and in accordance with Government Code 935.4, the Board delegates to the Superintendent the authority to allow, compromise or settle claims of $50,000 or less pursuant to any conditions of coverage in the District's JPA agreement or insurance coverage. The following case(s) are brought forward for ratification for the period of December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
Claim Number Funding Amount Comments
1893800002 $24,386.02 Compromise & Release w/voluntary resignation FISCAL IMPACT:
Workers' Compensation Fund: $24,386.02
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Gary Bradbury, CSP, CSRM, CEA, CPSI
Director, Safety and Risk Management
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:GB:mn
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the over $5,000 Purchase Order Report? INFORMATION:
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the ratification of the Workers' Compensation Claims for under $50,000, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject N. Business Services - Approval of Purchase Order Report (PO's exceeding $5,000) Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the over $5,000 Purchase Order Report, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 20/31 The Board of Education expects that purchase orders exceeding $5,000 will be brought forward for approval. The attached report for the period of December 10, 2020, through December 31, 2020, is presented for approval. Purchase orders have been approved by the department administrator as a necessary expense for the instructional or support program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
General Fund: $1,355,578.17
Deferred Maintenance Fund: $96,628.76
Bond Measure I: $5,352,663.23
TOPASS Fund: $494,942.00
Worker Compensation Fund: $5,181.00
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Anthony Frutos, CPPB, CPSM
Director, Purchasing
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:AF:ls
Location Description Location Description Location Description 000 District Office 190 Sequoia 44D Fiscal Services
010 Acacia 195 Sycamore Canyon 45D Technology Services
020 Aspen 200 TOHS 46D Purchasing
030 Banyan 220 University 49D Risk Management
040 Colina 230 Walnut 50D Maintenance & Operations
050 Conejo ES 245 Century Academy 54D Grounds
060 CVHS 24D Special Ed 55D Middle School Instruction
070 Cypress 250 Weathersfield 56D High School Instruction 080 Glenwood 260 Westlake ES 59D Planning & Facilities
100 Ladera 270 WHS 84D Student Support Services
105 Lang Ranch 280 Westlake Hills BRK BreakThrough
110 Los Cerritos 28D Instructional Services CND Child Nutrition 120 Madrona 290 Wildwood CVAD Conejo Valley Adult Ed
135 EARTHS 29D Elementary Instruction NCS Neighborhood City Center 140 Maple 37D Superintendent PSC Printing Services Center 160 NPHS 41D Personnel TRAN Transportation
17W Park Oaks Central Kitchen 42D Classified Personnel WHNP Central Warehouse 180 Redwood 43D Business Services
File Attachments
PO Board Report 5K+ 1-19-21.pdf (98 KB)
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject O. Business Services - Ratification of Purchase Order Report (PO's under $5,000) Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 21/31 ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the ratification of the under $5,000 Purchase Order Report? INFORMATION:
The Board of Education expects that purchase orders under $5,000 will be brought forward for approval. The attached report for the period of December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020, is presented for ratification. Purchase orders have been approved by the department administrator as a necessary expense for the instructional or support program(s).
FISCAL IMPACT:
General Fund: $193,861.74
Adult Education: $11,507.89
Child Development Fund: $2,909.68
Cafeteria Fund: $734.97
Deferred Maintenance Fund: $14,179.57
Bond Measure I: $16,037.19
Developer Donation Fund #2: $960.00
Worker Compensation Fund: $119.92
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Anthony Frutos, CPPB, CPSM
Director, Purchasing
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:AF:ls
Location Description Location Description Location Description 000 District Office 190 Sequoia 44D Fiscal Services
010 Acacia 195 Sycamore Canyon 45D Technology Services
020 Aspen 200 TOHS 46D Purchasing
030 Banyan 220 University 49D Risk Management
040 Colina 230 Walnut 50D Maintenance & Operations
050 Conejo ES 245 Century Academy 54D Grounds
060 CVHS 24D Special Ed 55D Middle School Instruction
070 Cypress 250 Weathersfield 56D High School Instruction 080 Glenwood 260 Westlake ES 59D Planning & Facilities
100 Ladera 270 WHS 84D Student Support Services
105 Lang Ranch 280 Westlake Hills BRK BreakThrough
110 Los Cerritos 28D Instructional Services CND Child Nutrition 120 Madrona 290 Wildwood CVAD Conejo Valley Adult Ed
135 EARTHS 29D Elementary Instruction NCS Neighborhood City Center 140 Maple 37D Superintendent PSC Printing Services Center 160 NPHS 41D Personnel TRAN Transportation
17W Park Oaks Central Kitchen 42D Classified Personnel WHNP Central Warehouse 180 Redwood 43D Business Services
File Attachments
PO Board Report Under 5K 1-19-21.pdf (149 KB)
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the ratification of the under $5,000 Purchase Order Report, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 22/31 ISSUE:
The Board of Education is required to approve the Quarterly Report on Williams Uniform Complaints for the quarter ending December 31, 2020.
INFORMATION:
California Education Code §35186 requires that the Superintendent, or designee, report summarized data on the nature and resolution of all Williams Uniform Complaints on a quarterly basis to the Board of Education and to the County Superintendent of Schools. The attached Quarterly Report includes the number of complaints by the general subject area with the number of resolved and unresolved complaints.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
2021-01-26 UCP Quarterly Williams Report.pdf (55 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendment to the 2020-2021 Major Project List? These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject P. Business Services - Approval of Quarterly Report on Williams Uniform Complaints Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the quarterly report on the Williams Uniform Complaints, as submitted.
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject Q. Business Services - Amendment to the 2020-2021 Major Project List Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the amendment to the 2020-2021 Major Project List, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 23/31 BACKGROUND:
On May 5, 2020, the major project list was presented to the Board of Education and approved. As conditions change, projects are updated, added, held, modified or deleted. The attached list represents the most up to date list of projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Bond Measure I: $65,415,437
Developer Donations Fund #2: $622,700
TOPASS Fund: $3,795,142
Deferred Maintenance Fund: $569,801
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
File Attachments
Major Project List Update 2021-01-19.pdf (147 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve Change Order 2 to the contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., for the concrete portion of the project at Newbury Park High School?
INFORMATION:
On August 4, 2020, the Conejo Valley Unified School District entered into a contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., for the concrete portion of the project at Newbury Park High School. Details of this change order are attached, and include an additional base, which includes compacted rock and sand, required for new concrete installations. The total cost adjustment of this change order is an increase to the original scope of work. Reference purchase order B21-00616.
Amended contract amount: $137,165.33
Change order amount: $9,715.99
New contract amount: $146,881.32
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject R. Business Services - MEASURE I - Change Order 2: New Athletic Field and Parking Lot - Newbury Park High School - Ardalan Construction Company, Inc.
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve Change Order 2 to modify the contract with Ardalan Construction Company, Inc., as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 24/31 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Bond Measure I: $9,715.99
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
File Attachments
01 19 21 - CO2 - Athletic Fld - Ardalan.pdf (369 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education award the contract for the below trade for the new STEM Building project at Westlake High School, to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder(s)?
INFORMATION:
The Westlake High School STEM project has been out to bid via two legally permitted mechanisms, straight bid and leaseleaseback, with each resulting in bids coming in significantly higher than the estimated budget of $13.9 million. After lengthy analysis, an evaluation of the current construction environment, and a review of the Districts' ability to manage a large scale project, the District will proceed with the project through a multi-prime delivery method where the District will act as the General Contractor. This District has identified significant savings using this method, and though it bears some risk, it bears significant advantages and greater control during the construction process. The District will work directly with sub-contractors to allow scheduling input, define milestone targets, review change orders, and report to a District representative that will be on-site each day for the duration of the project. This first phase of contracts were publicly advertised for bids in compliance with public contract and bidding laws with results as follows:
Trade Job Walk Date # Attending # Bid Award to Contract Amount Flooring December 2, 2020 3 3 Reliable Floor Covering, Inc. $88,050 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Bond Measure I: $88,050
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject S. Business Services - MEASURE I - Award of Contract - Flooring for New STEM Building - Westlake High School
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Award the contract for flooring for the new STEM building at Westlake High School, as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 25/31 Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
File Attachments
WHS BR - Flooring.pdf (44 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the award of the contracts listed below, to be in place for the period of July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021?
INFORMATION:
Field Contracts are issued to contractors, where the purchase order issued is less than $15,000, and defines all requirements, including insurances, prevailing wages, liabilities and expectations by this District. These contracts will allow projects identified by Planning & Facilities and Maintenance & Operations to react quickly to urgent needs and repairs to school sites. All contracts will expire June 30, 2021.
Professional Services Contracts are issued to architects, surveyors, or other professionals where specialty services are required for construction projects. All requirements, including insurances, liabilities and expectations by this District are identified. These contracts expire following the completion of the project.
The items below detail contracts awarded as follows:
Contractor
California State
License Board #
(CSLB)
Department of
Industrial Relations #
(DIR) or Other
Specialty
Contract Amount
Funding Source
Flewelling & Moody Architects Specialty Exempt Architectural Firm $7,000 MI
Fire Guard Professional Svcs Specialty Exempt Sprinkler Engineer $4,250 MI
Vogue Sign Company 830204 1000525038 Electrical Signs $1,900 MI
R-Help Construction Co, Inc. 673147 100007050 General Eng Contractor $2,992 MI
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject T. Business Services - MEASURE I - Approval of Contracts Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the contracts, as submitted. 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 26/31 Benner and Carpenter Specialty Exempt Surveyor $34,000
MI
FISCAL IMPACT:
Bond Measure I: $50,142
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Tim McCabe
Director, Planning and Construction
On behalf of,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:TM:dmh
File Attachments
FM SO C.006 - BAN Shade EXE BOE.pdf (1,030 KB)
NPH PSA Hydraulic Placard - Fire Guard EXE BOE.pdf (567 KB) DW FC Scoreboards - Vogue Sign EXE BOE.pdf (789 KB)
DW FC Earthwork - R-Help EXE BOE.pdf (1,087 KB)
DW PSA Engineering - Benner and Carpenter EXE BOE.pdf (1,244 KB) ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education ratify the submission of the COVID-19 site request form to the Ventura County Health Care Agency and the State of California, as submitted?
INFORMATION:
The COVID pandemic has significantly impacted our community and the District's operations. In an effort to provide a planned, coordinated and convenient testing process for the District's essential employees and the greater community at large, the District has submitted an offer to the State of California to utilize one of the District's vacant sites, specifically an empty plot of land at 1400 East Janss Road, as an outdoor (mobile) testing site. If the offer is accepted, details will be worked out between District Administration and the State and/or County Health Agency(s).
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Respectfully submitted,
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject U. Business Services - Approval of Submission for COVID-19 Testing Site Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Ratify the submission of the COVID-19 site request form to the Ventura County Health Care Agency and the State of California, as submitted.
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 27/31 Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
File Attachments
COVID-19 Site Request Form - DEC.pdf (192 KB)
ISSUE:
File Attachments
2021-01-05 AR3513.1 Cellular Phone Reimbursement - Proposed.pdf (13 KB) These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action items.
Subject V. Business Services - Approval of New Administrative Regulation 3513.1 - Cellular Phone Reimbursement
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 4. ACTION ITEMS – CONSENT
Type Action (Consent)
Recommended Action Approve the new Administrative Regulation 3513.1 - Cellular Phone Reimbursement, as submitted.
Should the Board of Education approve the new Administrative Regulation 3513.1 - Cellular Phone Reimbursement? INFORMATION:
CVUSD receives updates to Board Policies and Administrative Regulations from GAMUT. GAMUT is a policy update service offered through the California School Boards Association (CSBA), which provides information about new laws and court opinions which may affect Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, and Board Bylaws.
Administrative Regulation 3513.1 is an optional regulation for districts that provide cell phones to their employees. Since the CVUSD provides cell phones to staff, this regulation is deemed necessary.
LEGEND:
Black/Bold - new language from GAMUT
Black/Bold/Italics - new language created by CVUSD staff Red - notes provided for information only
Strikeouts - language recommended for removal
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Victor P. Hayek, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
MWM:VPH:mn
These items are considered routine and will be approved in one action without discussion. If Board members request that an item be removed from Consent or a citizen wishes to speak to an item, the item will be considered under Action 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 28/31
5. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS - GENERAL
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve amendments to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 1312.3 – Uniform Complaint Procedures?
INFORMATION:
The Board Policy and Administrative Regulation are updated to reflect new laws authorizing the use of uniform complaint procedures (UCP) to resolve allegations of noncompliance with accommodations for pregnant and parenting students (AB 2289), the development and adoption of an LCFF budget overview for parents/guardians (AB 1808), the development of a school plan for student achievement (AB 716), and specified educational rights of migrant students and immigrant students enrolled in a newcomer program (AB 2121). The policy also updates the section on "Non-UCP Complaints" to reflect new law (AB 1808) which provides that complaints alleging health and safety violations in license-exempt California State Preschool Programs are subject to Williams UCP. The regulation also updates the section on "Notifications" to more closely reflect the California Department of Education's (CDE) Federal Program Monitoring instrument, deletes the section on "District Responsibilities" which duplicates material in other sections, reorganizes the section on "Report of Findings" for clarity, and revises the section on "Corrective Actions" to delete item #9 which is not a remedy.
The Board Policy is updated to add medical condition as a characteristic that is protected from discrimination. The policy and regulation are updated to reflect new law (SB 75, 2019) which extends the use of uniform complaint procedures (UCP) to complaints alleging noncompliance with the physical education instructional minutes requirement for grades 7-12, and add an item indicating the use of the UCP for complaints regarding health and safety in a license-exempt California State Preschool Program (CSPP) consistent with CDE's Federal Program Monitoring Instrument.
The Board Policy is updated to reflect the relationship between the state uniform complaint procedures (UCP) and new federal regulations (85 Fed. Reg. 30026) regarding Title IX complaints of sexual harassment. The policy also reflects new state regulations (Register 2020, No. 21) which limit the applicability of the UCP for complaints regarding special education and child nutrition programs, add procedures for addressing complaints regarding health and safety deficiencies in license-exempt California State Preschool Programs (CSPP), and delete the referral of complaints of fraud to the California Department of Education (CDE). The list of programs subject to the UCP revised and reorganized the policy to more directly reflect CDE's 2020-21 Federal Program Monitoring (FPM) instrument.
The Administrative Regulation is updated to provide optional language stating that the compliance officer for purposes of the UCP will be the same person designated to serve as the Title IX Coordinator for addressing complaints of sexual harassment. The section on "Notifications" reflects CDE's 2020-21 FPM instrument which requires additional content for the annual notification to students, parents/guardians, employees, and others. The regulation was also updated to reflect new state regulations (Register 2020, No. 21) which (1) clarify that for complaints related to the local control and accountability plan (LCAP), the date of the alleged violation is the date when the County Superintendent of Schools approves the LCAP, (2) designate the final written decision as the "investigation report" and specifies required components for that report, (3) change the timeline for filing an appeal to CDE from 15 calendar days to 30 calendar days, (4) expand the basis upon which an appeal may be filed, (5) require the district to submit specified documents to CDE within 10 days after the district has been notified that an appeal has been filed, (6) require the district to investigate and address any allegations that CDE determines were not addressed in the district's investigation, (7) require CDE to issue a written decision regarding an appeal within 60 days of CDE's receipt of the appeal unless extended by written agreement or documentation by CDE of exceptional circumstances, and (8) authorize either party to request reconsideration by the Superintendent of Public Instruction or designee within 30 days of the appeal decision. The section on "Health and Safety Complaints for License-Exempt Preschool Programs" reflects a requirement of new state regulations to include in the annual UCP notification a list of which district programs are licensed or exempt from licensing.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
items.
Subject A. Instructional Services - Approval of Amendments to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 1312.3 – Uniform Complaint Procedures Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 5. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Information
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 29/31 Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Luis Lichtl
Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services
MWM:LL:ab
File Attachments
BP 1312.3 - Uniform Complaint Procedures.pdf (416 KB)
AR 1312.3 - Uniform Complaint Procedures.pdf (673 KB)
ISSUE:
Should the Board of Education approve the amendments to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6142.1 - Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Instruction?
INFORMATION:
The Board Policy (BP) is updated to reflect the goals of the California Healthy Youth Act (AB 329), including the addition of a timeline for notification to parents/guardians that they may request to excuse their child from comprehensive sexual health and HIV prevention education.
The Administrative Regulation (AR) is updated to reflect new law (AB 1861, 2018) which requires that comprehensive sexual health education includes specified information regarding human trafficking, and new law (AB 1868, 2018) which authorizes instruction regarding the potential risks and consequences of electronically sharing suggestive or sexually explicit materials. The section on "Professional Learning" is updated to reflect a legal requirement to provide periodic staff development regarding sexual abuse and human trafficking.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
LEGEND:
RED-Existing Notes
Red/Bold-New GAMUT Notes
Black/Bold-New GAMUT
Subject B. Instructional Services - Approval of Amendments to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6142.1 - Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Instruction
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 5. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS - GENERAL
Type Information
Goals Goal 1: Implement targeted actions and services that support positive student outcomes. (Student Focused)
Goal 2: Ensure highly qualified and effective staff are provided with targeted professional development, and have an understanding that all job responsibilities are structured to support positive student outcomes. (Internal Focused)
Goal 3: Provide communication and targeted outreach that informs the community of programs & opportunities that support positive student outcomes. (Community Focused) Goal 4: Enhance the social, emotional and physical well-being for all students through targeted actions that support positive student outcomes. (School/Community focused) 10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 30/31 Black/Bold/Italics-Our New Language
Respectfully submitted,
Mark W. McLaughlin, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Prepared by,
Luis Lichtl
Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Services
MWM:LL:ab
File Attachments
BP 6142.1 Sexual Health and HIV AIDS Prevention Instruction.pdf (599 KB) AR 6142.1 Sexual Health and HIV AIDS Prevention Instruction.pdf (639 KB)
6. ADJOURNMENT
Current Board topics staff are working on and anticipated date(s) to bring information back to the Board:
Scheduled:
Title IX Coordinators on School Campuses - advertisement and process flow chart (2-2-21) Equity Task Force Update (2-2-21)
Dates To Be Determined:
Enrollment during/after COVID-19
Governance Handbook
BP 1313 - Civility
Purpose and expectation of District committees
Technology Committee Report
Cell Phones - How each site handles student usage
Bathroom issues at the school sites
Ongoing:
Addition of curriculum/literature written by diverse authors/incorporation of programs and events to include culture Report on activities/events at the sites in relation to acknowledgement of District adopted Resolutions
FUTURE BOARD MEETINGS
February 2, 2021
Subject A. Future Board Topics / Activities
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 6. ADJOURNMENT
Type Information
Subject B. Adjournment
Meeting Jan 26, 2021 - Regular Board Meeting
Category 6. ADJOURNMENT
Type Procedural
10/8/21, 2:11 PM BoardDocs® Plus
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/conejo/Board.nsf/Public 31/31 4:00 p.m. Discussion Session (CSBA Debrief)
5:00 p.m. Closed Session
6:00 p.m. Open Session
Location: Conejo Valley High School (CVUSD Board Room), 1402 E. Janss Road, Thousand Oaks For a copy of this agenda and additional information, please visit the CVUSD website.