Ukiah City Council
September 17, 2025

31 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
For the above reasons, impacts to geology from the loss of topsoil or erosion would be less than significant.
(e) No impact. No septic tanks or other waste water disposal systems are proposed. No impact. (f) Less than significant impact. The geology of the Western Hills area is of the Franciscan Complex that dates to the Jurassic Period, approximately 199.6 to 145.5 million years ago. The Franciscan complex consists of arkosic sandstone interbedded within shale. Arkose is a coarse and well sorted quartz with a fine-grained matrix. Additionally, the Franciscan Complex can include rocks such as chert, serpentinite, basalt, and greenstone. The Franciscan complex, widespread in coastal California, has produced only small collections of significant fossils. Additionally, construction of the trail would only disturb the first few feet of soil where fossils are generally not known to be found. Therefore, the Project would not destroy unique paleontological resources or site or unique geologic features.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: The Project would have a significant effect on greenhouse gas emissions if it would generate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Environmental Setting: Climate change is caused by greenhouse gases (GHGs) emitted into the atmosphere around the world from a variety of sources, including the combustion of fuel for energy and transportation, cement manufacturing, and refrigerant emissions. GHGs are those gases that have the ability to trap heat in the atmosphere, a process that is analogous to the way a greenhouse traps heat. GHGs may be emitted a result of human activities, as well as through natural processes.

Increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere are leading to global climate change.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most important anthropogenic GHG because it comprises the majority of total GHG emissions emitted per year and it is very long-lived in the atmosphere. Typically, when evaluating GHG emissions they are expressed as carbon dioxide equivalents, or CO2e, which is a

32 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
means of weighting the global warming potential (GWP) of the different gases relative to the global warming effect of CO2, which has a GWP value of one. In the United States, CO2 emissions account for about 85 percent of the CO2e emissions, followed by methane at about eight percent, and nitrous oxide at about five percent.

The state of California has adopted various administrative initiatives and legislation relating to climate change, much of which set aggressive goals for GHG emissions reductions statewide. Although lead agencies must evaluate climate change and GHG emissions of projects subject to CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines do not require or suggest specific methodologies for performing an assessment or specific thresholds of significance and do not specify GHG reduction mitigation measures. No state agency has developed binding regulations for analyzing GHG emissions, determining their significance, or mitigating significant effects in CEQA documents. Thus, lead agencies exercise their discretion in determining how to analyze GHGs. Because there are no adopted GHG thresholds applicable to the Project, and because the Project is considered “small scale”, the below qualitative analysis is appropriate.

Discussion: (a-b) Less than significant impact. The Project, which includes both the construction of up to 22 miles of new trails and the ongoing maintenance activities detailed in the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

These emissions will primarily result indirectly from the combustion of fossil fuels by construction equipment and maintenance vehicles. Equipment used for trail construction includes small excavators and power tools. WHWPA maintenance activities will involve equipment such as dozers, masticators, chippers, and other vehicles for tasks like vegetation clearing, road grading, chipping, and dead tree removal across approximately five and a half miles of roads and fire breaks.

The generation of GHG emissions from these activities will be temporary and intermittent. The Project does not involve significant grading or extensive new construction that would lead to a substantial, long-term increase in GHG emissions, nor does it induce population growth or extend infrastructure that would indirectly increase emissions. All construction and maintenance equipment will comply with applicable state and federal emissions standards (e.g., CARB and EPA standards), which help to reduce overall emissions.

Furthermore, the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), an integral part of this Project, includes vegetation management and forest thinning as primary objectives. These activities, by reducing hazardous deadfall and maintaining "shaded fuel breaks", contribute to forest health and wildfire risk reduction. This proactive management can help prevent larger, catastrophic wildfires, which are significant sources of GHG emissions. While the Project involves some tree removal, Mitigation Measure BIO-6 requires a 6-to-1 replacement ratio for any tree greater than 6 inches dbh removed, thereby addressing potential carbon loss. The project does not conflict with any adopted plan, policy, or regulation for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, such as California's efforts toward 100 percent renewable and zero-carbon energy by 2045 (SB 100).

Considering the temporary and intermittent nature of emissions, adherence to regulatory standards, the lack of growth inducement, and the long-term wildfire risk reduction benefits, the Project's direct and indirect generation of GHG emissions would not have a significant impact on the environment.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None

33 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would
the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: The Project would result in significant hazards or hazardous materials impacts if it exposed people to hazardous materials or placed them into hazardous situations; if it released hazardous materials or emissions into the environment or within 0.25 miles of a school; if it is located on a listed hazardous materials site; if it would create a hazard due to its proximity to a public airport or private airstrip; if it would create excessive noise for people in the area; if it would interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan; or if it would expose people or structures to significant risks due to wildland fire.

Environmental Setting: Mendocino County has adopted numerous plans related to hazard management and mitigation including, but not limited to: Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Hazardous Waste Management Plan, Operational Area Emergency Plan, etc. The most recent plan, the Mendocino County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) was adopted by the County in December, 2020. The MJHMP provides an explanation of prevalent hazards within the

34 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
County, identifies risks to vulnerable assets, both people and property, and provides a mitigation strategy to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources. The four cities within Mendocino County, including the City of Ukiah, participated in preparation of the MJHMP to individually assess hazards, explore hazard vulnerability, develop mitigation strategies, and create their own plan for each respective city (referred to as a “jurisdictional annex” to the MJHMP). The City of Ukiah adopted its jurisdictional annex chapter of the MJHMP on November 18, 2020. Hazards identified for the City if Ukiah include earthquakes, wildfire, dam failure, flood and pandemic. Table 1-13 of the City’s jurisdictional annex lists each hazard and mitigation action for City of Ukiah. Mitigation number ma-WF-UK-60 from the plan describes the need to implement a fuel modification program. The inclusion of Fire Hardened trails in the construction plan helps realize this goal.

The Ukiah Municipal Airport is located within the City of Ukiah jurisdictional limits. The Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP) was adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission on May 20, 2021 and adopted by the Ukiah City Council on June 16, 2021. The UKIALUCP identifies areas (known as “compatibility zones”) with potential hazards and impacts to persons using or working within the vicinity of the airport.

The site does not include any known hazardous waste sites, as mapped by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) or the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) on the GeoTracker and EnviroStor databases, respectively, nor are there any listed sites within the vicinity of the site.

All lands within the City of Ukiah are within the jurisdiction of the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority. None of the lands within the City of Ukiah are located within a California Department of Forestry (CalFire) State Responsibility Area (SRA). However, some parcels within the western boundary of the City limits, including the Project site, are designated as “Very High” fire severity within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA).

Discussion: (a-b) Less than significant impact. Construction activities limited to the use of powered equipment, as needed, may include the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of small quantities of common hazardous materials, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluids, and oils.

However, the types and quantities of materials to be used are not expected to pose a significant risk to the public and/or environment and would be managed in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. Impacts would be less than significant.
(c) Less than significant impact. Ukiah High School and Pomolita Middle School are located more than one-half mile away from the proposed trail alignment and as noted above, the use of hazardous materials for construction would be in accordance with all applicable regulations; impacts would be less than significant.
(d) No impact. As previously noted, under Government Code Section 65962.5, both the State Water Resources Control Board and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control are required to maintain databases of sites known to have hazardous substances present in the environment. Both agencies maintain such databases on their websites, known as GeoTracker and EnviroStor.

According to these databases, the Project site(s) do not contain any listed hazardous sites; no impact would occur.
(e) Less than significant impact. The Project parcel is located approximately 1.86 miles northwest of the Ukiah Municipal Airport within the Other Airport Environs (OAE) Compatibility Zone of the

35 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
UKIACLUP, which is identified as having a low risk level associated with airport operations. Occasional overflights may be intrusive to some outdoor activities but the OAE zone does not contain any regulations regarding intensity of use or other standards specific to airport safety concerns that would be applicable to the Project. According to Table 3A of the UKIALUCP, most land-use categories, including recreation facilities, parks and open land areas are considered normally compatible in the OAE compatibility zone. Based on this information, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. Impacts would be less than significant.
(f) Less than significant impact. There are no components of the Project that would impair or interfere with emergency response or evacuation. The proposed trail would be accessed from an existing park and parking lot. There are no components of the Project that would impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the adopted MJHMP or other emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
(g) Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. As previously noted, the Project site is designated as having a “Very High” fire severity within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA).

However, the use of the Proposed trail would not substantially increase the risk of wildfire in the area.

Temporary construction activities involving the occasional use of gasoline-powered tools and equipment could introduce new temporary sources of ignition that could increase fire risk. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

For the reasons stated, the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. See Section V.20, Wildfire, for more information. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures:
c. Fuel the equipment in a safe place where spills can be contained and a fire extinguisher is nearby. Use the recommended gas/oil mixture and do not top off. Use a funnel or spout for pouring. Wipe off any spills.
d. Do not refuel running or hot equipment. Dispense fuel at least 10 feet from sources of ignition. e. Do not use equipment in areas of dry vegetation. Keep leaves and dry materials away from a hot muffler.
f. No smoking or open flame allowed near gasoline-powered equipment.

HAZ-1: Should portable gasoline-powered equipment be used on site, the following firesafe precautions shall be taken:
a. Spark arresters are required on all portable gasoline-powered equipment. b. Equipment shall be maintained in good working condition, with exhaust systems and spark arresters in proper working order and free of carbon buildup.

36 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

10. Hydrology and Water Quality
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the
project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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 a 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 onor 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
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?
Significance Criteria: The Project would significantly impact hydrology and water quality if it violated water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantially degraded surface or groundwater quality; substantially decreased groundwater supplies or impeded sustainable groundwater management; altered drainage patterns in a manner that would cause substantial on- or off-site erosion, polluted runoff or excessive runoff that caused flooding; impeded or redirected flood flows; risked a release of pollutants due to inundation if in a flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zone; or conflicted with a water quality plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Environmental Setting: Average rainfall in Ukiah is slightly less than 35 inches. Most of the precipitation falls during the winter. Rainfall is often from brief, intense storms, which move in from the northwest. Virtually no rainfall occurs during the summer months.

The Project area includes the Russian River Hydrologic Unit, Upper Russian River Hydrologic Area, Ukiah Hydrologic Subarea. The Russian River is on the State Water Resources Control Board’s

37 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
(SWRCB) 303(d) list of impaired water bodies for water temperature and sedimentation/siltation.

Sediment impairments in tributaries led to listing the entire Russian River Watershed for sediment.

Surface water supplies for the Ukiah Valley include the Eel River, from which water is diverted into the Russian River watershed through the Potter Valley Project, Lake Mendocino, and the Russian River.

Groundwater is drawn from the Ukiah Valley groundwater basin. The Ukiah Valley groundwater basin is the northernmost basin in the Russian River water system and underlies an area of approximately 60 square miles. Water enters the groundwater system via percolation of surface waters and through the soil. The creeks and streams in the Ukiah Valley provide drainage channels for groundwater recharge, as well as domestic and agricultural water supply. The City of Ukiah 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) was adopted by City Council on June 2, 2021. The UWMP considers several growth scenarios including an additional 2,500 and 5,000 new hookup scenarios and determined that there is capacity through the 2045 planning horizon to serve these growth projections.

Discussion: (a-b & e) No impact. No groundwater would be used for construction or operation of the trail. No new facilities are proposed. The Project would not require water to be discharged and groundwater would not be impacted by the Project. No impact. (ci-iii) Less than significant impact with mitigation. The project area contains one Class I and a variety of III watercourses. The WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), which will be implemented by the City as part of this Project, includes ongoing maintenance activities such as "Road Work" (clearing vegetation, grading, shaping road surfaces, and identifying repair needs) and "Understory Thinning/Brushing". These activities, if not properly managed, have the potential to cause erosion, alter drainage patterns, and impact water quality.

However, the WHWPA Maintenance Plan itself specifies that "No work will be done under this management plan within 50 feet of a class III or higher flow stream". This 50-foot no-work buffer serves as a primary protective measure for water quality during maintenance activities. For areas outside this buffer, and for trail construction near drainages, adherence to the UVTG Design and Maintenance Standards is required. Critically, the WHWPA Plan states that "road work be in accord with the Handbook for Forest, Ranch, & Rural Roads (2015)", a widely recognized best practice guide for minimizing hydrological impacts from forest roads. Furthermore, Mitigation Measure BIO-7 from this ISMND requires that all earthwork within or adjacent to (50 feet) any watercourse or other body of water shall adhere to standard methods of erosion and sediment control (e.g., placement of straw, mulch, seeding, straw wattles, silt fencing). Work will be completed during the dry season when possible to reduce sediment load downstream. These combined practices ensure that activities under the WHWPA Maintenance Plan, as well as trail construction, minimize erosion and prevent substantial alterations to drainage patterns that could cause flooding or polluted runoff. The maintenance activities are specifically undertaken "to control erosion, protect water quality, and maintain facilities". Therefore, impacts associated with erosion, siltation, drainage, and water quality would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
(d) No impact. The Project is not located within a tsunami hazard zone, nor a flood zone, as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures:

Implementation of BIO-7

38 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

11. Land Use and Planning
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: The Project would significantly impact land use if it physically divided an established community or conflicted with a land use plan, policy or regulation intended to avoid or mitigate an environmental impact, such as the general plan or zoning code.

Environmental Setting: The City of Ukiah includes approximately 4.72 square miles. It serves as the County Seat of Mendocino County, as well as the county’s commercial hub. Predominant land uses in the City include single-family residential, multi-family residential, and commercial uses ranging from local commercial to service commercial, as well manufacturing, industrial and public facilities.

The City of Ukiah is governed by the City’s 2040 General Plan adopted on December 7,2022. More specifically, zoning and land use are governed by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, as outlined in Division 9, Chapter 2 of the Ukiah City Code. The purpose of the Ukiah Zoning Code is to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare. The larger Ukiah Valley is governed by the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP; 2011), which is a comprehensive and long range inter-jurisdictional planning document that represents the vision and foresight of the people who live and work in the Ukiah Valley. This plan governs land use and development on the unincorporated lands in the Ukiah Valley. Further, the Western Hills Watershed Protection Area Master Plan (adopted February 2024) guides the use of the project area and site.

Discussion: (a) Less than significant impact. Physical division of an existing community would typically be associated with construction of a new highway, railroad, park or other linear feature being constructed in a manner that would bifurcate an established neighborhood or community. Although the project would be near existing homes, it will not be in between homes. Future development may lead to the trail being between homes, but an existing easement across the effected parcel predates the homes being built so therefore the project would not result in the division of an established community. Impacts would be less than significant.
(b) Less than significant. The approximate 760 acre project site lies within the City owned Western Hills Watershed protection area with one short section of trail crossing a private property parcel via an existing trail easement. The Project site is zoned Public Facilities and carries a 2040 General Plan Land Use designation of Public Facility. Objective 13 of the Western Hills Watershed Protection Area Master Plan commits the City to “Provide Safe Public Access for Citizen Science, Education, Volunteer Management, and Recreation.”

39 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
The proposed trail would not be detrimental to surrounding residences, nor would it prohibit the potential development of residences in the area. Accordingly, it was determined that in this case, the public hiking trail is an “allowed” use and does not require discretionary review.

The project supports 2040 General Plan Goals in elements A1 Land Use, A4 Public Facilities, and A5 Environment and Sustainability.

LU-6.3 Open Space Access. The City shall encourage new hillside developments to provide public access (as appropriate) to adjacent greenways, open space corridors, trails, and parks if development is proposed adjacent to such facilities.

PFS-12 To provide parks, recreational facilities, and trails for residents and visitors.

PFS-12.1 Connected Park System. The City shall provide an interconnected park system that creates an urban greenbelt and links all trail systems within the City.

PFS-12.3 Equitable Access to Parks and Recreation Facilities . The City shall establish new parks and recreation facilities to ensure all residents have access within a one-mile radius of their place of residence regardless of socioeconomic status.

ENV-6.7 Public Open Space. The City shall work with Mendocino County and the Public Spaces Commission to identify and select appropriate locations along creek channels, hillsides, and ridgelines that would be appropriate for future acquisition and development as trails, pocket parks, wildlife preserves, or other public open space.

Based on the aforementioned, the Project is consistent with all applicable land use plans and regulations; the Project would not result in 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. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None

12. Mineral Resources
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: Impacts to mineral resources would be considered significant if the proposed Project were to result in the loss of a known mineral resource that has value to the region and state or is otherwise locally important as designated on a local land use plan.

40 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Environmental Setting: The most predominant of the minerals found in Mendocino County are aggregate resource minerals, primarily sand and gravel, found along many rivers and streams. The Ford Gravel Bars are located in Ukiah, along the Russian River.

Discussion: (a-b) No impact. There are no identified mineral resources within the Project area. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: None

13. Noise
NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 ground borne vibration
or ground borne 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
Significance Criteria: The Project would have a significant impact if it temporarily or permanently exceeded local noise standards in the vicinity of the Project, generated excessive ground borne noise or vibration; or would expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels from public airports or private airstrips.

Environmental Setting: The Ukiah City Code does not contain thresholds for analyzing noise impacts from construction-related noise but guidance documents from the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Highway Administration provide information on maximum noise and vibration levels associated with construction equipment and thresholds of significance for analyzing such impacts.

Although the Ukiah City Code does not contain thresholds of significance for analyzing constructionrelated noise, UCC §6054, Construction of Buildings and Projects, states that it shall be unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within a radius of five hundred feet (500’) therefrom, to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures or projects or to operate any pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist or any other construction type device (between the hours of 7:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day) in

41 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is caused discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit therefor has been duly obtained from the Director of Public works.

The UCC’s Noise Ordinance (Division 7, Chapter 1, Article 6) establishes ambient base noise level standards that apply to specific zoning districts within the City of Ukiah. These are specific to operation (not construction). “Ambient noise” is the all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment, being usually a composite of sounds from many sources near and far. For the purpose of the Noise Ordinance, ambient noise level is the level obtained when the noise level is averaged over a period of fifteen (15) minutes without inclusion of noise from isolated identifiable sources, at the location and time of day near that at which a comparison is to be made. Land uses exceeding these standards for long periods of time are considered to be significant.

Discussion: (a) Less than significant impact. Construction activities for the Lookout Peak Trail Project and ongoing maintenance activities under the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G) will generate temporary increases in ambient noise levels. Equipment used, as detailed in Attachment G, can include dozers, masticators, chippers, and chainsaws for vegetation clearing, road work, and dead tree removal. Maximum noise levels associated with such tools typically range from 73 to 89 decibels (dBA)
The nearest sensitive receptors are residences on Helen Avenue, Doolin Canyon Drive, and San Jacinta Drive, as well as Nokomis Elementary School. While these areas are sensitive to noise, over 80% of the total trail alignments and the majority of WHWPA maintenance activities will occur greater than a half-mile from the closest residence and the school. All construction and maintenance activities will occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., in accordance with City of Ukiah Code (UCC) Section 6054, which restricts such activities within residential zones or within 500 feet thereof. Given the temporary, intermittent nature and geographic distribution of these activities, along with adherence to City noise ordinances, noise impacts associated with the Project would be less than significant. (b) Less than significant impact. Project construction and WHWPA maintenance activities, particularly those involving equipment like vibratory rollers/compactors ("vibraplates"), dozers, or masticators, can generate ground-borne vibration. The Federal Transit Administration's Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual identifies 0.2 inches per second peak particle velocity (in/sec PPV) as the level for potential damage to non-engineered timber and masonry buildings.

Although a vibratory roller/compactor might generate up to 0.210 in/sec PPV at 25 feet, the Project's nearest residence is approximately 1,200 feet away. Given this distance and the non-constant operation of such equipment along the trail alignments and road/fire break routes, the Project would not result in significant ground-borne vibration. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (c) Less than significant impact. The Project parcel is located approximately 1.86 miles northwest of the Ukiah Municipal Airport within the Other Airport Environs (OAE) Compatibility Zone of the UKIACLUP, which is identified as having a low risk level associated with airport operations. Occasional overflights may be intrusive to some outdoor activities but the OAE zone does not contain any regulations regarding intensity of use or other standards specific to airport safety concerns that would be applicable to the Project. According to Table 3A of the UKIALUCP, most land-use categories, including recreation facilities, parks and open land areas are considered normally compatible in the OAE compatibility zone. Based on this information, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. Impacts would be less than significant.

42 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Mitigation Measures: None

14. Population and Housing
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: The proposed Project would result in significant impacts to the local population or housing stock if it directly or indirectly induced substantial unplanned population growth or displaced a substantial number of people or housing such that the construction of replacement housing would be required.

Environmental Setting: The City of Ukiah comprises of approximately 4.72 square miles within Mendocino County. Overall, the City of Ukiah’s population has increased moderately over the past nearly 30 years, with a more accelerated increase in the last four years. Projections from the California State University Chico Center for Economic Development- Mendocino County Economic/Demographic Profile show this trend continuing. As described in the City’s Housing Element (2019) of the General Plan, the City’s annual growth rate between 1990 and 2018 averaged approximately 0.3%. Between 2000 and 2010, the City added 545 residents, or 3.7%, to its population.

According to the California Department of Finance, the population in the County of Mendocino was 59,985 in 2018 and 16,226 in the City of Ukiah. The newly released 2020 Census data identifies the City of Ukiah population as 16,607.

Discussion: (a-b) No Impact. The Project would not involve the construction of new homes or businesses, or the extension of roads that would induce population growth, nor would the Project displace any people or housing, as no residences are located on-site. No impact.

Mitigation Measures: None

43 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

15. Public Services
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) 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 public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Significance Criteria: The Project would result in a significant impact to public services if it resulted in a requirement for increased or expanded public service facilities or staffing, including fire or police protection, schools and parks.

Environmental Setting: Police protection services for the entire City limits is provided by the Ukiah Police Department, while the Mendocino County Sherriff’s Department provides police services for areas outside of the City limits. Fire protection services in the City are provided by the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority. Educational facilities in the City are provided by the Ukiah Unified School District (UUSD) and County Office of Education. Additionally, there are several private and charter schools serving residents within the City of Ukiah. As mentioned below in Section 16, Recreation, of this Initial Study, there are 13 City parks, a municipal golf course, and a skate park managed by the City of Ukiah, as well as other recreational facilities in the area.

Discussion: (a) Less than significant impact. To further strengthen the environmental review, and in direct response to comments received during the public review period, particularly from the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA), this ISMND has been updated to explicitly incorporate and analyze the ongoing maintenance activities outlined in the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G). Mitigation Measures PS-1 and PS-2, along with other applicable mitigation measures throughout this document, comprehensively address the environmental effects of these maintenance activities, ensuring all impacts remain less than significant.

City of Ukiah Police Department and Ukiah Valley Fire Authority will be responsible for emergency response in the Project area. Without mitigations the project could lead to prolonged, difficult medical responses for injured trail users. Mitigation measures will ensure collaboration between Ukiah Valley Fire Authority officials and trail designers to assure trail alignments and features support the most efficient possible rescue of injured trail users.

44 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
The Project would not affect the number of students served by local schools, nor would it increase the number of new residents to the area, which could require the construction of expanded school facilities.

The trail will be predominantly maintained by UVTG volunteers in order to minimize or avoid the use of City park staff.

As such, the Project would not result in 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 public services. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures:

PS-1 – Prior to construction of new trail sections, trail designers and/or builders will consult with Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA) officials to identify and incorporate, as required, specific approaches to facilitate search and rescue operations, thereby ensuring efficient rescue and reducing response times to a less-than significant level. These approaches shall include, but not be limited to:
a. Medical rescue life-flight landing zones.
b. Trail connectors between trail sections and access roads to facilitate first responder access.

PS-2 – City of Ukiah will develop and implement a Road and Fire Break maintenance schedule utilizing the City’s Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan outlining City departments responsible for individual maintenance tasks.

16. Recreation
RECREATION. Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: Impacts to recreation would be significant if the Project resulted in increased use of existing parks or recreational facilities to the extent that substantial deterioration was accelerated or if the Project involved the development or expansion of recreational facilities that would have an adverse effect on the physical environment.

45 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Environmental Setting: The City of Ukiah manages several recreation facilities, including more than 13 City parks. In addition, there are approximately 30 miles of trails located throughout the Ukiah Valley, under City, County, and federal jurisdiction.

Discussion: (a-b) Less than significant impact. Opening the Western Hills Watershed Protection Area to the public for recreational trail use will involve the development of additional recreational facilities in the City of Ukiah. Both existing and new trail users will be attracted to the site. While many users will walk or bike to the site, some will drive creating additional traffic and reduced on street parking in the neighborhood. On the other hand, existing trail users are expected to divert some of their recreational time from other sites to this new trail system thereby offsetting the impact to this area by decreasing the impact on the other trail systems in surrounding neighborhoods.

The trailhead will be in a residential neighborhood off Helen Ave at the bottom of Doolin Canyon Drive.

The neighborhood has no through traffic and reaches a dead end at the southern end of Helen Avenue. The limited number of homes in this isolated area results in very low baseline traffic volumes.

Traffic impacts are discussed in section 17. “Transportation. “ While the elimination of the proposed second trailhead on Helen Avenue in response to public comment reduces potential parking demand in that immediate vicinity, the remaining single trailhead on Doolin Canyon Road could still affect on-street parking for residents on Helen Avenue. To mitigate this concern, the City proposes to paint parking space delineators along the east side of Helen Avenue.

These delineators are expected to increase the amount of available parking space by reducing inefficient spacing between parked cars, thereby optimizing the existing parking capacity. From the intersection at Washington Street to its terminus, Helen Avenue is over 1200 feet long with on-street parking on both sides of the street. This provides room for over 100 cars to be parked on existing onstreet locations. On-street parking also extends further to the north on Helen Avenue and to the east on Washington Avenue providing additional parking. As a point of comparison, Low Gap Park is the closest available trailhead providing parking for trail users, skateboarders, tennis players, and other park users to the very popular park. The parking lot at Low Gap Park has room for about 50 cars and is rarely full. Similar to Low Gap Park, parking on Helen will serve multiple neighborhood activities including trail users, overflow parking for Nokomis Elementary School, families and sports teams using the fields at Nokomis Elementary School, and residential parking. The comparison with Low Gap Park, with half as many parking spots, suggests there is adequate on street parking for the new use in the area while acknowledging parking may be limited on weekends and during events at the Nokomis fields. However, equestrian use will not be permitted on the trails due to a lack of adequate parking and the increased expense of building and maintaining trails that will withstand the greater impact of horses and mules.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None

46 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

17. Transportation
TRANSPORTATION. Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §
15064.3, subdivision (b), Criteria for Analyzing Traffic Impacts?
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?
Significance Criteria: Impacts to transportation and traffic would be significant if the Project conflicted with a local plan, ordinance or policy addressing transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; conflicted with CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15064.3(b), which contains criteria for analyzing transportation impacts; substantially increased hazards due to geometric design features; or resulted in inadequate emergency access.

Traditionally, transportation impacts had been evaluated by using Level of Service (LOS) analysis to measure the level of congestion on local roadways. However, on September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law, initiating an update to the CEQA Guidelines to change how lead agencies evaluate transportation impacts under CEQA, with the goal to better measure the actual transportation-related environmental impacts of a given project. This change was formally adopted into CEQA Guidelines effective July 1, 2020. VMT measures the additional miles traveled by vehicles as a result of a project. If a project causes substantial increase in VMT, it may result in a significant environmental impact.

In 2018, the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI), formerly the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), published the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, offering nonbinding guidance to assist lead agencies in implementing VMT-based analysis. This advisory also identifies certain low-VMT generating project types that can be presumed to have a less than significant impact and provides screening thresholds that may be used to avoid the need for detailed modeling.

On behalf of the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG), Fehr & Peers prepared the SB 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled Regional Baseline Study (May, 2020). This study provides localized data and recommended VMT thresholds, and incorporates applicable goals and policies from transportation plan including:
• Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2015)
• City of Ukiah Safe Routes to School Plan (2014)
• Mendocino County Rail Trail Plan (2012)

47 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
• Ukiah Downtown Streetscape Improvement Plan (2009)
• City of Ukiah 2040 General Plan (Mobility Element)
• MCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan (2017)
• Section 5, Circulation and Transportation, of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (2011) Although the 2040 General Plan was adopted after the Baseline Study, its policies are aligned with VMT reduction strategies.

CEQA allows the lead agency to choose the most appropriate method for evaluating VMT. If an existing tool or model is unavailable for the project’s location, the lead agency may apply a qualitative analysis in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and LCI’s advisory.

Environmental Setting: The City of Ukiah generally lies west of U.S. 101 between the U.S. 101/North State Street interchange, and the U.S. 101 / South State Street interchange. Three major interchanges along U.S. 101, Talmage Road, Gobbi Street, and Perkins Street (from south to north), provide access to southern and central Ukiah. The City of Ukiah is developed in a typical grid pattern with streets generally oriented north to south and east to west. Bicycle lanes are located throughout the City and public transit is provided by the Mendocino Transit Authority (MTA).

The gateway to the Project site will be located on Doolin Canyon Road immediately off Helen Ave, a City-maintained two-lane road that is developed with on-street parking, and a pedestrian sidewalk on the east side of the road. The Nearest MTA bus stop is located approximately 600 yards away at the corner of Dora and Washinton Ave.

Discussion: (a-b) Less than significant impact. As outlined above, transportation impacts are considered significant if the project conflicts with applicable circulation plans or causes a substantial increase in VMT under CEQA Guidelines §15064.3(b).

The project proposes construction of a non-motorized, Class trail, consistent with local and regional transportation and land use plans. LCI’s 2018 Technical Advisory identifies trails and bicycle/pedestrian facilities as project types that generally do not result in significant VMT increases.

Similarly, the MCOG Baseline Study provides screening criteria (Section 3.3) for exempting projects that are located in low-VMT areas, are low VMT-generating by type (e.g. trails), generate minimal new trips, and are consistent with a jurisdiction’s General Plan or other regional plans. This trail project meets those criteria. It will generate few or no new vehicle trips, supports active transportation, and is consistent with both the City of Ukiah 2040 General Plan and MCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan.

While the VMTscreening tool developed for MCPG by Fehr & Peers does not currently include the project location, CEQA allows for qualitative VMT analysis when modeling is infeasible. Given the project’s limited scale, recreational nature, and consistency with transportation goals, impacts related to circulation and VMT would be less than significant.
(c-d) Less than significant impact. The proposed trails would be accessed from a single trailhead located at the bottom of Doolin Canyon Road, and would not introduce new road or roadway modifications. Emergency access would continue to be provided through existing facilities, and the Project does not propose any changes that would impair access or emergency response capabilities.

No geometric design features such as sharp curves, new intersections, or incompatible land uses are proposed.

48 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Furthermore, the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), which is an integral part of this Project, outlines "Road Work" activities including the clearing of encroaching vegetation and grading of road surfaces to "assure safe ingress and egress for routine maintenance, site monitoring, and emergency access" for the total of five and a half miles of roads and fire breaks within the WHWPA. The primary objectives of this Maintenance Plan are to "assure existing roads and fire breaks are open and available to emergency personnel and vehicles". The plan also explicitly includes the maintenance of Medevac Landing Zones in feasible locations to allow medevac helicopter landing.

These proactive measures are formalized through Mitigation Measure PS-1 (Public Services), which requires that prior to construction of new trail sections, trail designers and/or builders will consult with Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA) officials to identify and incorporate, as required, specific approaches to facilitate search and rescue operations, thereby ensuring efficient rescue and reducing response times to a less-than-significant level. These approaches shall include, but not be limited to, medical rescue life-flight landing zones and trail connectors between trail sections and access roads to facilitate first responder access. This comprehensive commitment ensures that potential emergency access needs for the new trail system and the broader WHWPA are adequately addressed, supporting the finding that impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant. Therefore, the project would not create new safety hazards or result in inadequate emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: Implementation of PS-1

18. Tribal Cultural Resources
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section 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:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Significance Criteria: An impact to tribal cultural resources would be significant if the Project were to substantially reduce the significance of a tribal cultural resource, a listed or eligible historic resource, or a resource considered significant by a California Native American tribe. Tribal cultural resources include “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to

49 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
a California Native American Tribe” that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) or included in a local register of historical resources. Lead agencies are required to “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the Proposed Project.” The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified.

Environmental Setting: As discussed in Section 5, Cultural Resources, areas that are most typically culturally sensitive include those adjacent to streams, springs, and mid-slope benches above watercourses because Native Americans and settlers favored easy access to potable water.

Tribes known to be present within the Ukiah area include (but are not limited to) the following:
• Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
• Guidiville Indian Rancheria of Pomo Indians
• Hopland Band of Pomo Indians
• Pinoleville Pomo Nation
• Potter Valley Rancheria
• Redwood Valley Little River Band of Pomo Indians
• Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians
• Yokayo Tribe, not federally recognized
Discussion: (a-b) Less than significant impact. As described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study, no cultural resources were identified within the Project area as a result of the records search, literature review, or archaeological field surveys. In addition, due to its topography, the site is considered to have a “low potential” for cultural, archeological, and historic resources. Because the Project has been designed with minimal ground disturbance and the site does not have a high potential for resources to occur, less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the Project. Regardless, construction of the Project will be required to adhere to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e-f) which specifically addresses what to do in the event that human remains or archeological resources are accidentally discovered.

As noted above, in accordance with AB 52, a notification was sent to the Guidiville Rancheria of California on June 17, 2025, offering the opportunity for consultation. To date, no response has been received. Should a response or consultation request be received within the AB 52 response window, the environmental review will be updated accordingly. Therefore, impacts to cultural and archaeological resources are anticipated to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: None

50 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

19. Utilities and Service Systems
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
Significance Criteria: Impacts to utility and service systems would be significant if the Project resulted in the construction or expansion of utilities that could cause significant environmental effects; have insufficient water supplies available to the Project during normal to extremely dry years; resulted in inadequate capacity of the wastewater treatment plant; generated solid waste exceeding the capacity of local infrastructure or impairing the achievement of solid waste reduction goals; or failed to comply with any management and reduction statutes or regulations related to solid waste.

Environmental Setting: The majority of City properties are served by City water, sewer, electricity and trash collection as summarized below.

Electric. The City of Ukiah’s Electric Utility Department provides electric services to properties within the City limits, while Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides services to properties outside of the City.

Water. Water services in the City of Ukiah are provided by the Ukiah Valley Water Authority (UVWA), which is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) formed between the City of Ukiah, Millview County Water District, Redwood Valley County Water District, Calpella County Water District, and Willow County Water District. The City of Ukiah 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) was adopted by City Council on June 2, 2021. The UWMP considers several growth scenarios including an additional 2,500

51 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
and 5,000 hookup scenarios and determined that there is capacity through the 2045 planning horizon to serve these growth projections.

Sewer and Wastewater. The Ukiah Valley Sanitation District (UVSD) and the City of Ukiah provide public sewer services to customers within their boundaries under the purview of the State Water Quality Control Board. The City’s sewage treatment plant and Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP), operational since 1958, serves the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, however the Project parcel is not located within the service area.

Solid Waste. The Ukiah landfill, outside City limits on Vichy Springs Road, stopped receiving municipal solid waste in 2001 and the City is working on capping the landfill. No new waste generated will be processed through the landfill. Solid waste generated in the Ukiah Valley is exported for disposal to the Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano County. The Valley’s solid waste disposal system consists of a large volume transfer station, Ukiah Transfer Station, which receives waste for export.

Discussion: (a-e) No Impact. Users of the proposed trial would utilize existing infrastructure, including access roads, parking lots, water fountains and restrooms; no additional utilities are needed for the proposed trail. Any waste produced from construction activities would be disposed of at the Ukiah Transfer Station in accordance with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. No impact to utilities and service systems would occur.

Mitigation Measures: None

20. Wildfire
WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response planor 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?
Significance Criteria: Impacts to wildfire would be significant if the Project were located in or near a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones and

52 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
substantially impaired an emergency response plan; exposed Project occupants to wildfire pollutants or uncontrolled spread of wildfire due to site conditions such as slope and prevailing winds; require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risk; or expose people or structures to significant risks as a result of post-fire runoff, slope instability or drainage changes.

Environmental Setting: All lands within the City of Ukiah are within the jurisdiction of the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority. None of the lands within the City of Ukiah are located within a California Department of Forestry (CalFire) State Responsibility Area (SRA). However, some parcels within the western boundary of the City limits, including the Project site, are designated as “Very High” fire severity within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA).

As discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the County’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) address emergency operations, natural disasters (including wildfire), as well as mitigation strategies to reduce potential risks. The City of Ukiah adopted its “jurisdictional annex” chapter of the MJHMP on November 18, 2020. Hazards identified for the City of Ukiah include earthquakes, wildfire, dam failure, flood and pandemic. Table 1-13 of the City’s jurisdictional annex lists each hazard and mitigation action for City of Ukiah.

Discussion: (a) Less than significant impact. The proposed trail would be accessed via existing streets. There are no components of the Project that would conflict with, or impair the adopted Mendocino County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP), Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), or other adopted emergency response plan or emergency evaluation plan. To further ensure efficient emergency response for trail users and to enhance overall wildfire emergency access within the project area, the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G) explicitly includes "Road Work" activities to "assure safe ingress and egress for routine maintenance, site monitoring, and emergency access" on the five and a half miles of roads and fire breaks. The primary objectives of this plan are to "assure existing roads and fire breaks are open and available to emergency personnel and vehicles". The plan also details the maintenance of Medevac Landing Zones in feasible locations, to be kept clear at specific dimensions (at least 75’x75’, 100’x100’ if possible) to allow helicopter landing for emergency medical transport These measures are formalized through Mitigation Measure PS-1 (Public Services), which requires pre-construction consultation with Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA) officials to identify and incorporate, as required, specific approaches such as medical rescue life-flight landing zones and trail connectors between trail sections and access roads. These measures are designed to facilitate search and rescue operations, thereby ensuring efficient rescue and reducing response times to a less-thansignificant level. With the implementation of PS-1, supported by the specific provisions of the WHWPA Maintenance Plan, impacts related to emergency response plan impairment would be less than significant.

Discussion: (b & d) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The Project site is located within an area designated as having "Very High" fire severity risk within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The area is "steep with slopes ranging from 30-70 percent" and the "vegetation is overgrown in some locations and wildfire has been suppressed for decades," leading to "increasingly dense and unhealthy western forests". These conditions inherently exacerbate wildfire risks.

The WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), which will be implemented as part of this Project, is specifically designed as a proactive strategy to reduce these inherent wildfire risks and enhance safety for both trail users and emergency personnel within this high-risk area.

53 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Mitigation Measure PS-2 (Public Services) commits the City of Ukiah to develop and implement a Road and Fire Break maintenance schedule utilizing the City’s WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan. This plan outlines comprehensive fuel modification activities including "Clearing of encroaching vegetation with hand crews, dozers, or masticators," "Understory Thinning/Brushing," "Piling, Burning" (with permits), "Chipping/Hauling," and "Dead Tree Removal". These activities are explicitly aimed at ensuring "forest lands are thinned of hazardous deadfall," "shaded fuel breaks along roads are maintained," and the area is "safe for future anticipated public access". The plan also acknowledges that roads, while an asset for firefighting, can be a liability due to fuel loading, and maintenance is needed to "ensure safe access during a fire event". These actions directly reduce fuel loads and contribute to a healthier, more resilient forest, thereby mitigating wildfire risks and supporting the broader fuel modification program identified for the City in its MJHMP.

While temporary construction activities for the trail, involving the use of gasoline-powered tools and equipment, could introduce temporary sources of ignition that might increase fire risk, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) requires fire-safe precautions, including spark arresters on all portable gasoline-powered equipment and proper maintenance of equipment.

Furthermore, after construction, the UVTG will consult with the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority to assess trail segments for "fire-hardening" (Attachment F), a strategy that combines vegetation management and recreational trails for fuels reduction and enhanced access. The active wildfire risk reduction efforts under the WHWPA Maintenance Plan, coupled with Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, ensure that the Project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose people or structures to significant risks from wildland fires, and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impacts from post-fire runoff, slope instability, or drainage changes would also be mitigated by the ongoing maintenance and erosion control specified in the WHWPA Plan (Objective 3) and BIO-7. (c) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The Project, through its integration with the WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan (Attachment G), does require the ongoing maintenance of existing infrastructure, specifically roads and fire breaks, within the Western Hills Watershed Protection Area. This is contrary to the prior discussion's statement that the Project would "not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure... that would exacerbate fire risk" [Source:

Lookout Peak Trails Draft ISMND9_9.pdf, p. 50]. However, the specific purpose of this required maintenance, as detailed in the WHWPA Plan, is explicitly to reduce, rather than exacerbate, fire risk.

Activities such as clearing encroaching vegetation, grading roads for emergency access, and thinning hazardous deadfall are designed to create a "safe environment" and maintain "safe ingress and egress" for emergency personnel. Mitigation Measure PS-2 (Public Services) formalizes the City's commitment to implement a maintenance schedule for these vital fire breaks and access roads utilizing the WHWPA Plan [Source: Mitigation Measures, PS-2]. Therefore, the ongoing maintenance of this infrastructure, as governed and mitigated by PS-2 and explicitly guided by the objectives and activities of the WHWPA Maintenance Plan, serves to reduce fire risk and would not result in temporary or ongoing adverse impacts to the environment. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures:

Implementation of HAZ-1 and PS-2.

54 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to 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 incorporated. As described throughout the Initial Study, temporary ground disturbing activities associated with vegetation removal and trail construction could result in direct significant impacts to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Wildfire. However, mitigation measures identified within the aforementioned sections would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
(b) Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. Cumulative impacts are generally considered in analyses of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, and Traffic.

As discussed throughout the Initial Study, the Proposed Project would have less than significant impacts on these resources with implementation of mitigation measures described herein. Short-term construction impacts associated with the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in the area as there are no known past projects nor current projects within the vicinity of the site. Based on the findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, cumulative impacts related to the Proposed Project would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (c) Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. Based on the findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the Proposed Project would not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Attachment J
Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
VI. REFERENCES

1. Alta Archeological Consulting (Alta). Archeological Survey Report (ASR). City of Ukiah Western Hills Annex Ukiah, Mendocino County, California, APNs 001-040-83, 157-070- 01, 157-070-02, 003-190-01, 157-050-09. March, 2021.

2. CalFire State Responsibility Area Viewer https://hub-calfireforestry.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/state-responsibility-area-sra-viewer

3. CalFire, California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map Web Viewer. https://calfireforestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=988d431a42b242b29d895 97ab693d008

4. California Air Resources Board (CARB). California Releases Report Charting Path to 100 Percent Clean Electricity. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-releases-reportcharting-path-100-percent-clean-electricity

5. California Department of Conservation. California Geological Survey. Earthquake Fault Map, Ukiah. Zones of Required Investigation.
http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/UKIAH.PDF .

6. California Department of Conservation. California Geological Survey. U.S. Landslide Inventory Web Application.
https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ae120962f459434b8c9 04b456c82669d

7. California Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/

8. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Bios Vegetation Mapping. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS

9. California Department of Toxic Substance Control. EnviroStor database https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/

10. California Department of Transportation California State Scenic Highway System map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8 e8057116f1aacaa (Accessed 6/10/2024)

11. California Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. Tribal Cultural Resources (AB 52). https://lci.ca.gov/ceqa/tribal/

12. City of Ukiah 2040 General Plan. https://ukiah2040.com/

13. City of Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Prepared by Alta Planning + Design, W-Trans and Walk Bike Mendocino. August 2015. https://cityofukiah.com/wpcontent/uploads/2022/03/Ukiah-Bike-and-Pedestrian-Master-Plan-FINAL.pdf

14. City of Ukiah Code. Last amended 2021. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Ukiah

56 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

15. City of Ukiah. Housing Element Update 2019-2027. Adopted October 23, 2019 and Certified by HCD December 5, 2019. https://cityofukiah.com/housing-element-update2019-2027/

16. City of Ukiah (2021) Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP). https://cityofukiah.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Ukiah-Municipal-Airport-Land-UseCompatibility-Plan-2021.pdf

17. Federal Highway Administration. 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWAHEP-05-054). https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/8895

18. Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/researchinnovation/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-report-0123

19. Fehr & Peers, on behalf of the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG), Senate Bill 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled Regional Baseline Study. May 20, 2020. https://www.mendocinocog.org/vehicle-miles-traveled-vmt-regional-baseline-studycompleted

20. Fire Hardened Trails (Vegetation Management Corridors; Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship; US Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region 5; Plumas, Tahoe, Lassen and Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Nevada, Sierra, Plumas, Lassen and Butte Counties as well as the cities of Loyalton and Portola.

21. Jacobszoon and Associates, Inc. Biological Assessment Report. August 28.2024

22. Landslide Inventory (Beta). California Department of Conservation. California Geological Survey. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/

23. Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG). 2017 Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan. Prepared by Davey Bates Consulting. Adopted February 5, 2018. https://www.mendocinocog.org/files/742330750/2017+RTP+As+Adopted%28web+forma t%29.pdf

24. Mendocino County Air Quality Management District of the California North Coast Air Basin. Particulate Matter Attainment Plan. January 2005. https://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/aqmd/pm-attainment.html

25. Mendocino County Air Quality Management District website. http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/aqmd/diesel-engine-information.html.

26. Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission. Ukiah Municipal Land Use Compatibility Plan. Adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission on May 20, 2021 and adopted by the Ukiah City Council on June 16, 2021. http://www.cityofukiah.com/NewWeb/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ukiah-MunicipalAirport-Land-Use-Compatibility-Plan-2021.pdf

27. Mendocino County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). Adopted December, 2020. Vol 2, Chapter 1, City of Ukiah Jurisdictional Annex, adopted by the City of Ukiah November 18, 2020. https://mitigatehazards.com/mendocino-county/finalmjhmp/

28. Mendocino County Office of Education. Schools & Districts. https://www.mcoe.us/schools-districts/

57 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah

29. Mendocino County Public GIS Portal https://gis.mendocinocounty.org/portal/home/

30. State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker.
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov.

31. Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts In CEQA. December 2018. https://lci.ca.gov/docs/20180416- 743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf

32. U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm

33. U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife. Environmental Conservation Online System. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/

34. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Wetland Habitat Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html

35. Ukiah Valley Area Plan, adopted August 2, 2011.
https://www.mendocinocounty.org/government/planning-building-services/plans/ukiahvalley-area-plan

36. Ukiah Valley Trail Group. Low Gap Park Trail Plan. 2015.

58 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
VII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Monitoring and Documentation Sheet
Potential
Impact
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing Date
Implemented
Air Quality
AQ-1:

Vegetation
Removal.

Vegetation removal methods shall
include chopping larger materials onsite to be disbursed with materials largely in contact with the ground;
burning of vegetation shall not be
allowed without obtaining the
appropriate burn permits.

Contractor COU TC
AQ-2: Diesel
Engines –
Stationary
and Portable
Equipment
and Mobile
Vehicles:

Off-road equipment with auxiliary
diesel engines rated at 50 brake
horsepower or greater, must have
either a valid Air Quality permit, or a
state Portable Equipment Registration
Program (PERP) Registration.

Contractor COU TC
Biology
BIO-1:

Sensitive
Species
A Worker Awareness and Education
Program (WAEP) will be conducted
with trail crew leaders

COU COU PC
BIO-2:

Nesting
Birds.

Pre-construction surveys shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist prior
to any vegetation removal or ground
disturbing activities occurring between
March 1 and August 31 of any year
Contractor COU PC
BIO-3:

Roosting
Bats.

If evidence of bat roosts are observed
pre-construction bat surveys should be
conducted no more than 14 days prior
to groundbreaking activities.

Contractor COU PC
BIO-4:

Mammal
Dens or
Burrows.

If evidence of special-status mammal
borrows or denning activity is
observed, it is recommended that preconstruction surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist for activities that
may affect den sites
Contractor COU PC
BIO-5: OverWintering
Monarchs.

Monarch Butterflies “Over-Winter” in
groups between November 1st and
January 31st. If monarchs are
observed in this time frame monarch
surveys should be conducted by a
qualified biologist no more than 14
days prior to the commencement of
tree/shrub removal.

Contractor COU PC

59 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
BIO- 6:

Carbon Loss.

Any tree greater than 6 inches dbh
removed during construction shall be
replaced at a ratio of 6 to 1 at the
nearest available and appropriate site
as approved by a qualified
professional.

Contractor COU BC
BIO-7:

Watercourses
The Project shall adhere to UVTG
Design and Maintenance Standards
Contractor COU TC
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1 Should portable gasoline-powered
equipment be used on site firesafe
precautions a-f shall be taken
Contractor COU TC
Hydrology and Water Quality
BIO-7 The Project shall adhere to UVTG
Design and Maintenance Standards
Contractor COU TC
Public Services
PS-1 PS-1 – Prior to construction of new trail
sections, trail designers and/or builders
will consult with Ukiah Valley Fire
Authority (UVFA) officials to identify
and incorporate, as required, specific
approaches to facilitate search and
rescue operations, thereby ensuring
efficient rescue and reducing response
times to a less-than significant level.

These approaches shall include, but
not be limited to:
a. Medical rescue life-flight landing
zones.
b. Trail connectors between trail
sections and access roads to facilitate
first responder access.

Contractor,
COU
COU TC
PS-2 City of Ukiah will develop and
implement a Road and Fire Break
maintenance schedule utilizing the
City’s Road and Fire Break
Maintenance Plan outlining City
departments responsible for individual
maintenance tasks.

COU COU TC
Wildfire
HAZ-1 Should portable gasoline-powered
equipment be used on site firesafe
precautions a-f shall be taken
Contractor COU TC
*Mitigation measures are abbreviated for this documentation sheet. Implementation and monitoring must comply with all aspects of the measure as outlined in the ISMND. * COU = City of Ukiah
* TC = Throughout Construction
* PC = Prior to Construction
* BC = Before Completion

60 Lookout Peak Trails
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
VIII. ATTACHMENTS
A. Existing Conditions Photographs
B. Final Recorded Map and Deed (LLA25-000003)
C. City of Ukiah Native Plant Palette
D. Ukiah Valley Trail Group Philosophy and Design and Maintenance Standards E. Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails: Concept Plan Review
F. Fire- Hardened Trails (Vegetation Management Corridors) G. WHWPA Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan
H. Biological Assessment Report
I. Concept Trail Map

Attachment A – Existing Conditions Photos
Bobcat on Main Access Road at Lower elevation
Red Shouldered Hawk on Main Access Road Near Lookout Peak

View to East on Foggy Day
View to West

Redwood Ave Ridge Road
Fire Break Off Main Road

View of Ukiah from Project Site
Fire Break Along Main Road Near Lookout Peak

Examples of Similar Trails in Similar Environments
Sol y Sombra Trai.l ~1 mile to north in Mixed woodland

Sol y Sombra Trail ~1 mile to north in Redwoods

Sol y Sombra Trail ~1 mile to north in chaparral

Attachment B - Final Recorded Map and Deed (LLA25-000003) 23 ·24 26 25
Par K
AP 157- 030- 03
City of Ukiah
did not change
Parcel I
IN 2025-02655
N
I
T 15 N

I I I I
I
N 1/4
S 30
-7
I I I I Redwood
Avenue
D tk J
Par J
L
______ ______ _ c.v_4_· ___________ _ 1 __ _ ___ ~ - ---- ~--------, 5 ~ I c~
Final Parcel Deeds
Parcel Inst. No.

A 2025-02645
B 2025-02646
C 2025-02647
D 2025- 02649
E 2025-02650
F 2025-02651
G 2025- 02653
H 2025- 02654
I 2025-02655
J 2025-02656
Note:

The large parcel was IN 2025-02648 after the
first LLA, it then became IN 2025- 02652 after
second LLA and then became IN 2025-02655
after the third and final LLA.
the
Property line (typ)
per these LLA 's
I s~
I I
I
I
25 30
36 31 Parcels after LLA 's
Redwood Avenue, Ukiah
April 1, 2025 Scale: 1"=1150'
J __ _
0 1150 2300 3450

./

WHEN RECORDED RETURN

AND MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO
City of Ukiah, City Clerk
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, Ca 95482
The undersigned Grantor declares that the
Document Transfer Tax is$ 0, value less than $100
Pursuant to RT 11922 / 27383

CONFORMED COPY
Copy of Document Rec orded o n 04/ 01 / 2025 09 :50 : 17 AM as 2025- 02655 Mendocino County Cl e rk-Recorde r

QUITCLAIM DEED
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation and D&J Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company hereby REMISE, RELEASE, AND FOREVER QUITCLAIM to:

City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation
The following described real property in the City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, State of California SEE ATTACHED Exhibit "A" (Parcel 3 City LLA File No. LLA25-000003) and Exhibit "B" (Plot Map) This deed is given pursuant to the City of Ukiah Lot Line Adjustment File No. LLA25-000003 and is intended to create no new parcel.
'
City. f~
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
D&J Investments, LLC
David J. Hull
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF MENDOCINO
0n 5 }3,, /.2s • " . befo~ me, • }( t ,: 7J 11.{ ltLiv'tt,r; Ale lniy A, b l1C.J personally appeared S't;tC; £ . )cl v1 ~ 1 c<...t_ l 7, L l L ' , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence~ be the perso whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument, the persons or the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal
fA, l(Sht \(_ L:vi~[l-~~
Signature '

WHEN RECORDED RETURN

ANDMAILTAXSTATEMENTSTO
City of Ukiah, City Clerk
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, Ca 95482
The undersigned Grantor declares that the
Document Transfer Tax is$ 0, value I~ than $100
Pursuant to RT 11922 / 27383

QUITCLAIM DEED
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation and D&J Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company hereby REMISE, RELEASE, AND FOREVER QUITCLAIM to:

City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation
The following described real property in the City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, State of California SEE ATTACHED Exhibit" A" (Parcel 3 City LLA File No. LLA25-000003) and Exhtoit "B" (Plot Map) This deed is given pursuant to the City of Ukiah Lot Line Adjustment to create no new parcel.

City of Ukiah
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
ded
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF MENDOCINO
On ____ _______ _, before me, - ---:,,,c:..__ _ ___ ___ _ _ __, ~
personally appeared _ ________ -,,,,,e.:..__ _____ __, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons ose names are subscnoed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed th'""~"'"'e in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument, the persons or the • upon beha]f of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENAL
paragraph is true an<l~
WITNESSm
PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing

CALIFORNIA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
T A_l"f-k .D
~/i'?J/i-5

,,

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is
attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or
validitv of that document.

State of California
County of Sonoma )
• ~
On 11./)f_Ylih ~ I iozs- before me YORI HERRERA-GONZALEZ (Notary Public) 1 '-------------------
(insert name and title of the officer)
pers~nally appeared [)av:J_ J:. ·t/u!I
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same.in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I ce_rtify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Seal)
f"NIUINHIRIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIRIKIUftlRnllllllllllllllllllftllllllll~llllllNI lie~ YORI HERRERA-GONZALEZ 1i ;:; COMM. #2490587 ;
::1 M NOTARYPUBUC· CAUFORJ'IIA ~
~ SONOMA COUNlY ~ i ~ My CDmm. Exp. May 19, 2028 =
...._.,,,,111111JIIIJYIUIUIIIIIIIUIIIHIIIIIIWIUIIIIUNIIIIIIIIIII

EXHIBIT "A"
(Parcel 3 City LLA File No. LLA25-000003)
P-.ny and all lands and any and all
described real property:
interest thereto lying within the following
All that certain property situated in the City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, State of California, more particularly described as follows:

TRACT ONE:

A portion of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 30 , Township 15 North, Range 12 West, Mount Diablo Meridian described as follows:

COMMENCING at the center quarter corner of said Section 30 as shown on the Record of Survey maps recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, and Map Case 2, Drawer 16,

POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 87°39'28" East, 1150.96 feet; thence North 00°21'25" West, 1324.57 feet; thence South 88°25'18" West, 1142 . 19 feet; thence South 00°00'00" East, 1340 . 12 feet to the Point of Beginning.

TRACT TWO:

The south half of the southwest quarter of Section 19, Township 15 North, Range 12 West , Mount Diablo Meridian.

EXCEPTING therefrom the following:

BEGINNING at the southwest corner of Parcel 3 as shown on the final subdivision map of Subdivision 98- 37, recorded April 29, 2002 in Maps, Drawer 69, Pages 59-61, Mendocino County Records; thence South 00°00'35" East, 150.00 feet; thence North 89°59'25" East, 690.00 feet; thence North 00°00'35" West, 150.00 feet to the north line of the south half of the southwest quarter of said Section 19; thence along said line South 89°59'25" West, 60.00 feet to the southeast corner of said Parcel 3; t hence along the south line of said Parcel 3 South 89°59'25" West, 630 . 00 feet to the Point of Beginning.

TRACT THREE:

The east half of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 26, Lots 1, 2, 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Section 25, the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter o f Section 25, the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 25, arid the s outhwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 25, all in Township 15 North, Range 13 West, Mount Diablo Meridian.

Lot 7 of Section 30, the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 30, and the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 30, all in Township 15 North, Range 1 2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian as shown on the the Record of Survey maps recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, and Map Case 2, Drawer 16, Page 30, Mendocino County Records;,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM said TRACTS ONE, TWO and THREE the following:

EXCEPTION #1: (Inst No 2021-10029 = AP 003- 190- 13)
COMMENCING at the northeast 1/16th corner of said Section 30, shown as note 1 on the Record of Survey map recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, Mendocino County Records; th~nce along the east line of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30, North 00°21'25" West, 375.83 feet to the center of a private road as shown on said Record of Survey map and being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said east line and following a l ong the centerline of said road North 85°26'00" West, 109.50 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 275 . 00 feet, a central angle of 11°04 ' 30" and an arc length of 53.16 feet;' thence South 83°29'30" West, 143.44 feet; thence leaving said road North 90°00'00" West, 122.06 feet; thence North 00°00'00" East, 627.57 feet to the center of said private road at the easterly terminus of the course (N69°18'00 "W 235.59 ' ); thence along the centerline of said private road North ·69°18'00" West, 123.00 feet; thence leaving said road, North 00° 00' 00" East, 278. 55 feet to the north line of said northwest quarter of the northeast quarter· of said Section 30; thence along said north line

North 89°11'29" East, 536.00 feet to the northeast corner of said quarter quarter; thence along the east line of said quarter quarter South 00°21'25" East, 948.74 feet to the Point of Beginning.

EXCEPTION #2: (Inst No 2021-15566 = AP 003-190-15)
COMMENCING at the northeast 1/16th corne'r of said Section 30, shown as note 1 on the Record of Survey map recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, Mendocino County Records; thence along the east line of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30, North 00°21'25" West, 375.83 feet to the center of a private road as shown on said Record of Survey map; thence leaving said east line and following along the centerline of said road North 85°26'00" West, 109.50 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 275. 00 feet, a central angle of 11 °04 '30" and an arc length of 53.16 feet; thence South 83°29'30" West, 143.44 feet; thence leaving said road North 90°00'00" West, 122.06 feet; thence North 00°00'00" East, 627.57 feet to the center of said private road at the easterly terminus of the course (N69°18'00"W 235.59'); thence along the centerline of said private road North 69°18'00" West,· 123.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said road, North 00°00'00" East, 278.55 feet to the north line of said northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30; thence along said north line, South 89°11'29" West, 590.00 feet; thence leaving said north line, South 00°00'00" East, 130.00 feet; thence South 65°00'00" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00°00'00" East, 180.00 feet; thence North 90°00'00" East, 500.00 feet; thence North 65°34'56" East, 193.33 feet to the Point of Beginning.

EXCEPTION #3:

BEGINNING at the most northwest corner of the above described Exception #2, being on the north line of said northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30; thence leaving said north line, South 00°00'00" East, 130.00 feet; thence South 65°00'00" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00°00'00" East, 70.32 feet to the centerline of an existing road; thence along said centerline, North 65°34'19" West, 56.24 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 120. 00 feet, a central angle of 74°31'35" and an arc length of 156.09 feet; thence South 39°54'06" West, 160.58 feet; thence along a curve to the right with a radius of 80.00 feet, a central angle of 55°34' 10" and an arc length of 77. 59 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 80.00 feet, a central angle of 47°33'36" and an arc length of 66.41 feet; thence leaving said road North 90°00'00" West, 732.07 feet to the centerline of same road; thence along the centerline of said same road, North 05 ° 30' 48" West, 11. 49 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 180.00 feet, a central angle of 63°23'00" and an arc length of 199.12 feet; thence North 68°53'48" West, 46.56 feet; thence leaving said road, North 00°00'00" East, 220.00 feet; thence North 64 °23' 10" East, 1442 feet, more or less, to a point on the east line of· the south half of the southwest quarter of Section 19, Township 15 North, Range 12 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, mentioned above in Tract Two; thence Southerly along said east line, 602 feet, more or less, to the north quarter corner of said Section 30 as shown on the Record of Survey maps recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, and Map Case 2, Drawer 16, Page 30, Mendocino County Records; thence along the north line of said Section 30, North 89°11'29" East, 103.33 feet to the Point of Beginning. • EXCEPTION #4:

BEGINNING at the northeast 1/16th corner of said Section 30, shown as note 1 on the Record of Survey map recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, Mendocino County Records; thence along the east line of the northwe~t quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30, North 00°21'25" West, 375.83 feet to the center of a private road as shown on said Record of Survey map; thence leaving said east line and following along said road North 85°26'00" West, 109.50 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 275.00 feet, a central angle of 11°04'30" and an arc length of 53.16 feet; thence South 83°29'30" West, 143.44 feet; thence leaving said road North 90°00'00" West, 122.06. feet; thence South 39°00'00" East, 220.00 feet; thence South 03°00'00" West, 100.00 feet; .thence North 76°00'00" West, 280.00 feet; thence South 00°00'00" East, 950.00 feet; thence South 72°56'21" East, 600.00 feet to a point on the east line of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30; thence along said east line, North 00°21' 25" West, 961. 77 feet to the Point of Beginning.

EXCEPTION #5:

COMMENCING at the northeast 1/16th corner of said Section 30 , shown as note 1 on the Record of Survey map recorded in Map Case 2, Drawer 27, Page 1, Mendocino County Records; thence along the east line of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 30, North 00°21'25" Wes~ 375.83 feet to the center of a private road as shown on said Record of Survey map and being the southeast corner of the D & J Investments property described in . Instrument Number 2021-10029, Mendocino County Records; thence along the boundary of said property and leaving said east line and following along said road North 85°26'00" West, 109.50 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 275 . 00 feet, a central angle of 11°04'30" and an arc length of 53.16 feet; thence South 83°29 ' 30" West, 143.44 feet; thence leaving said road North 90°00 ' 00" West, 122.06 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 00°00'00" East, 627.57 feet to the center of said private road at the easterly terminus of the course (N69°18 '00"W 235. 59 ' ); thence along the center of said private road North 69°18'00" West, 123.00 feet to the southeast corner of the D & J Investments property described in Instrument Number 2021-15566 , Mendocino County Records ; thence along the south and east lines of said property and leaving said road, South 65 ° 34' 56" West, 193.33 feet; thence South 90°00 ' 00" West, 500.00 feet; thence North 00°00'00" East, 109.68 feet to the centerline of an existing road; thence leaving said D & J property line, along said centerline, North 65°34'19" West, 56.24 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 120 . 00 feet, a central angle of 74°31 ' 35" and an arc length of 156.09 feet ; thence South 39°54'06" West, 160 . 58 feet; thence along a curve to the right with a radius of 80.00 feet, a central angle of 55°34 ' 10" and an arc length of 77.59 feet; thence along a curve to the left with a radius of 80.00 feet, a central angle of 47°33'36" and an arc length of 66.41 feet; thence leaving said road, North 90°00 ' 00 " West, 233 . 85 feet; thence South 00°00'00" East, 520.00 feet; thence North 90°00'00" East, 1451.10 feet to the Point of Beginning.

EXCEPTION #6:

Excepting therefrom all the coal and other minerals in the lands so entered and patented, together with the right fo prospect for, mine and r emove the same pursuant to the provisions and limitations of the Act of December 29, 1916(39 Stat.,862) as reserved by the United States of America in the Patents recorded March 15, 1945 in Book 182 of Official Records, Page 212, and November 10, 1949 in Book 258 of Official Records, Page 273 , Mendocino County Records.

TRACT FOOR:

A portion of Lot 2 of Section 30, Township 15 North, Range 12 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, more particularly described as follows:

COMMENCING at a 1/2" iron pipe plugged L.S. 3089 and being the northwesterly corner of Lot 2 of said Section 30 as shown on the Record of Survey map recorded in Map Case 2 , Drawer 16, Page 30 , Mendocino County Records; thence along the west line of said Lot 2, South 00°10 '50" East, 884 . 00 feet to the northwest corner of the D & J Investments property described in Instrument Number 2022-12534 , Mendocino County Records; thence continuing South 00°10'50" East, along the west line o~ said property, 256 . 72 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said west line, South 00°10'50" East, 185.00 feet to a 1/2" iron pipe plugged L.S. 3089 being the southwesterly corner of said Lot 2 ; thence North 87°51 ' 37 " East, 504.77 feet to a 1/2" iron pipe plugged L.S. 3089 being the southeasterly corner of said Lot 2; thence along the east line of said Lot 2, North 00°13'08" West, 130.00 feet to a point from which the point of beginning bears North 85°54 '05" West; thence leaving said east line, North 85°54 ' 05 " West, 505.80 feet to the Point of Beginning.

TRACT FIVE:

BEGINNING at a post marked A.L.R.E . D. on the westerly line of Lot 77, ·Yokayo Rancho,

22.90 chains North 00~30' West from the southwest corner of Lot 27 of George Luce's Subdivision of said Lot 77; thence North 88°00' East, 1034.68 feet, more or less, to the west line of Helen Avenue; thence ~outh 04°50' East along the west line of Helen Avenue, 372 . 22 feet to the centerline of a road from Helen Avenue toward Doolan Canyon; thence along the center of said road, South 86°52 ' West, 252.84 feet; thence South 44°51 ' West , 54 . 22 feet; thence South 16°04' West, 140 . 28 feet; thence South

38°52' West, 224.49 feet; thence South 73°52' West, 189.48 feet; thence South 68°31' West, 153.60 feet; thence South 63°02' West, 140.51 feet; thence South 75°16' West, ·141.54 feet to the intersection of said centerline of said road with said westerly line of said Lot 77; thence along said westerly line, North 00°30' West, 905.32 feet, more or less, to the Point of Beginning . .,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM TRACT FIVE the following:

EXCEPTION A:

BEGINNING at the northeast corner of the D & J Investments property described in Instrument Number 2022-12534, Mendocino County Records, said point lying on the west line of TRACT FIVE; thence along the east line of said D & J Investments property and also being the west line of TRACT FIVE, South 00°13'08" East, 294.79 feet; thence leaving said line North 89°46'52" East, 35.00 feet; thence North 00°13'08" West, 294.79 feet; thence South 89°46'52" West, 35.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.

EXCEPTION B:

That portion conveyed by Mae Bell Stern to J.H. Penner, et ux, by deed dated March 16, 1946, recorded March 18, 1946 in Volume 194 of Official Records, Page 472, Mendocino County Records.

EXCEPTION C:

That portion conveyed by Mae Bell Gillespie, formerly Mae Bell Stern to E.A. Dunsing, et ux, by deed dated November 2, 1949, recorded November 16, 1949 in Volume 258 of Official Records, Page 299, Mendocino County Records.

Total AP's = 157-050-03 & 13 & 14 & 15 & 16 & 18, 157-030-02, 157-070-0Sx, 001-040- 83x, 003-190-llx & 17 & 19x, 157-060-02 & 03, 003-260-0lx, 003-500-14x This deed is given pursuant to City of Ukiah Lot Line Adjustment File LLA25-000003 and is intended to create no new parcel.

The Lot Line Adjustment shall not relinquish, remise, release or terminate any prior right, interest in rights-of-way, easements, or other rights which may be appurtenant to and/or and encumbrance to the subject property.

This real property description has been prepared by
me or under my direction in conformance with the
Professional Land Surveyor's Act.
~lJ. ~ 3--z.7-z;;-
Ron W. Franz~ 7173 Dated
The above legal description creates a lot line adjustment pursuant to the City of Ukiah Lot Line Adjustment File No.

LLA25-00003 which has been approved by the City of Ukiah in accordance with Section 66412(d) of the Subdivision
Map Act and is intended to create no new parcel.

APPROVED: ---------------- City Engineer, Tim E. Eriksen

23 24-
26 25
------------
N
I
T 15 N
lt:
!'.!
ct: a::
24- 19
Parcel 3
per this LLA
N 1/4-
S JO
-7
I
il. I
~
. I
I Redwood
•--------.....ci~--t'....__--i~~;.::enue
I
I I I
I I
I I I
c.,1/~,,_ ____ ...a.. ______ J_ ______ , ______ ...L------~ S 25 I C 1/4
Property line {typ)
per this LLA
.,
I s JO I I
I I
25 30
36 31
Plot Map
City of Ukiah Lot Line
Adjustment File No. LLA25-000003
Redwood Avenue, Ukiah
Mar 27, 2025 Scale: 1 "= 1150,
0 1150 2300 3450

Certificate of Acceptance
This is to certify that the interest in real' property conveyed by the Quitclaim Deed dated ·2> - 'l l- 2 ~ from City of Ukiah and D & J Investments, LLC , to the City of Ukiah, general law municipal corporation is hereby accepted by order of the undersigned officer on behalf of the City Council pursuant to authority conferred by resolution of the City Council adopted on February 1, 1961, and the Grantee consents to recordation thereof by . its duly authorized officer.

This document is presented for recordation by the City of Ukiah pursuant to Section 27281 of the Government Code.

By: S~c~<;r------
s~ Sangi mo, City Manager

CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California
County of Sacramento }
On March 31, 2025, before me, Kristine Lawler, Notary Public, personally appeared Sage Sangiacomo who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
i············i a KRISTlNE LAWI.ER
_ Notary Pub!lc • California • i Mendocino County s
Commission I 25062 5 -
~ a /Ill/ Comm. ~es Jan 2, 2029 t WITNESS my hand and official seal.

SIGNATURE

PLACE NOTARY SEAL ABOVE
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.

Description of attached document
Title or type of document: Certificate of Acceptance.

Document Date: March 31, 2025

Symbol Botanical Name Common
Name
Height
Spread exp
color bloom time
Riparian
Pocket Park
Trailside
Swale
Trees
BLM Acer macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple 5m- 15m 5m - 15m sun / par shadepink apr- may x x eld Acer negundo Box Elder 10m-15m 5m-12m shade pink feb-mar x Buc Aesculus californica CA Buckeye 3m-5m 5m-12m sun / par shadewhite may-jul x x x x Ald Alnus rhombifolia White Alder 10m- 30m 5m-10m sun NA sep-nov x Cot Populus fremontii Western Cottonwood10m-20m 8m-10m shade NA NA x VO Quercus lobata ( garryana) Valley Oak 10m -25m 10m-15m sun/ par shaderusty apr-may x LO Quercus parvula var shrevei Shreve Interior Live Oak 5m-16m 5m-15m sun/ par shadeYellow spring x Wil Salix lasiandra Willow 1m- 3m 1m-3m sun yellow may-apr x Bay Umbellularia californica CA Bay Laurel 2m-16m 1m-8m par shade NA mar-may x x Grasses/Sedges/Rushes
SBS Carex barbarae Santa Babara sedge0.5m- 0.1m 0.5m-3.0msun to shadena x x FS Carex praegracilis Slender Field sedge0.1m- 0.5m 0.1m-1.0msun / par shadena x OG Danthonia californica Ca Oat Grass 0.05m- 0.1m0.5m-1.0msun / par shadena x CR Juncus effusus Common soft Rush 0.3m-1.0m 0.3m-0.5msun / par shadena x BR Juncus patens Blue Rush 0.5m- 0.1m 0.5m-1.0msun to shadena x x DG Muhlenbergia rigens Deer grass 1m-1.5m 1m - 1.5m sun na x NG Stipa pulchra Purple needle grass0.7m-1.2m 0.1m - 0.5msun na x Shrubs
CB Baccharis pilularis Coyote bush 1.0m-3.0m 1.0m-4.0mSun white Oct-Jan x SpB Calycanthus occidentalis Spice bush 1.0m-3.0m 1.0m-5.0msun / par shadered apr-aug x x x cea Ceanothus sp. Ceanothus 2.0m-3.0m 2.5m-3.0msun white-blue x x red Cercis occidentalis Redbud 1.0m-5.0m 1.0m-5.0msun violet feb-apr x x x MM Cercocarpus betuloides Mountain Mahogany1.0m-5.0m 1.0m-2.0mfull sun white mar-may x CoB Frangula californica Coffeeberry 2.0m-3.0m 2.0m-3.0mSun Apr-May x x toy Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon 2.0m-6.0 2.0m-3.0mfull sun white jun-aug x x man Manzanita sp. manzanita Sun pink x x
HR Rhamnus ilicifolia Hollyleaf redberry 1.0m-4.0m 1.0m-3.0mPar shade NA Apr-May x x Attachment C City of Ukiah Native Plant Palette

SkB Rhus trilobata Skunk Bush 1.0m-1.0m 1.0m-3.0msun / par shadeyllow mar-may x x Symbol Botanical Name Common
Name
Height
Spread
exp
color
bloom time
Riparian
Pocket Park
Trailside
Swale
Shrubs (Continued)
SB Symphoricarpos albus var laevigatus Snow Berry 2.0m-4.0m 4.0m-6.0msun to shadepink may-jul x x Vines
PC Clematis lasiantha Pipestem clematis 2.0m-5.0m 0.5m-1.0msun / par shadecreamy mar-aug x x x HS Lonicera hispidula Honey Suckle 1.0m-6.0m 0.1m-0.3msun to shadepink apr-jul x WG Vitis californica Wild Grape 1.0m-3.0m 0.5m-3.0mfull sun may-jun x x Perennials/Bulbs/Annuals
MW Asclepias sp. Milk Weed 0.5m-1.0m 0.2m-0.3msun white jun-sep x x CF Epilobium canum California fuschia sun Red june-sept x OS Eriophyllum lanatum Oregon sunshine sun / par shadeYllow apr-aug x x CP Eschscholzia californica CA Poppies sun orange feb- sep x Gum Grindelia sp. Gumweed sun Yellow aug-sept x
Lup Lupinus sp. Lupine sun blue apr-jul x
MF Mimulus aurantiacus Monkey Flower sun / par shadeyllow mar-aug x SM Mimulus cardinalis Scarlet monkey flower sun / par shadeRd may-aug x x x Trees 34 (15 Gallon) 16 (5 Gallon) 12 (1 Gallon)
Grasses 4000 (2" Plugs)
Shrubs ( 1 Gallon) 500 ( 1 Gallon)
Vines 50 ( 1 Gallon)
Wildflower Seeds 6 lbs

Attachment D - Ukiah Valley Trail Group Design and Maintenance Standards
UVTG Design and Maintenance Standards (2024)
Trail Philosophy:Central to the Ukiah Valley Trail Group’s approach to trails is the recognition that our world is one of finite resources and, since demand for these resources is increasing steadily; insightful management is of utmost concern. The Inland Mendocino County Trail system must be designed to utilize resources in ways that benefit all non-motorized users.

This entails providing adequate accommodation and accessibility, rather than focusing on individual user groups. The increased sharing of resources sometimes creates friction between the diverse user groups vying for more trail space. This Trail Philosophy acknowledges that a certain amount of friction is inevitable and therefore focuses on planned communication to minimize the differences and optimize the benefits derived from these precious resources.

Plans for optimal use of trail resources must be in concert with the objective of natural and cultural resource protection. Any decisions on resource use affect not only local residents and visitors, but our natural and cultural habitat as well. If we make responsible decisions concerning preservation of our resources, we will succeed in our custodial duties to the environment while at the same time providing enjoyment for current and future generations. Through well designed, constructed, and maintained trails we will accomplish optimal public access while accommodating resource conservation.

Providing the public with increased access to trails and greenways is not enough; we must also strive to promote the abundant benefits that derive from them. Trail benefits include recreation, transportation, energy conservation, environment and habitat protection, fire suppression, improved physical and mental health, and local economic benefits. Informing the public of the significant benefits expands public awareness of the advantages that trails and greenways offer to the individual and the community. Gaining public support thereby encourages policy makers to support trails and greenways and to increase funding to better manage the trail system.

Improving relationships and interaction between government entities and the private sector will be necessary for the effective development of a well planned and managed trail and greenway system. Open communication between all levels of government and interested parties enhances the finding of common objectives by making individuals and groups part of the solution.

Linking communities and trail advocates in trail planning minimizes land use conflicts and allows for optimal resource use. Joint planning emphasizes the development of interconnected trails in natural settings and a united effort creates a stronger voice for advancing trail proposals.

The general goals that define a quality trail system include:
1-Adequate mileage
- Moderate strong bike or horse riders ride 15-20 miles in a day - Endurance riders will ride 100 miles in a day
- There are approximately 30 miles of trail in the Ukiah Valley Lake Mendocino currently has approximately 16 miles of trail and is near to maximum capacity.

Small increases are necessary but can be mitigated with road closures and road to trail conversions. Employing a “stacked loop” design can maximize the trail experience within the capacity.
2- Connectivity
- A single recreation area is unlikely to meet all the community’s needs. - Trails that connect the various areas are therefore necessary. - Connectivity allows trails to fulfill a transportation role. - Lake Mendocino Trails do not currently connect with any other trail systems. - Priority should be given to approving trails that link trail areas. 3- Variety of environments
- An example of each of the area's micro-ecosystems should be included, such as Riparian, oak woodland, mixed hardwoods etc.
- Trails should include sunny areas, which will be more desirable in the winter, and shady areas for summer use.
4- Variety of trail experiences
- Different trail users appreciate different trail characteristics. - Equestrians generally prefer wider trails.
- Mountain bikers generally prefer lots of rolling ups and downs with lots of turns and features.
- Runners tend to prefer gentle grades.
- Advanced users desire more “technical” or challenging trail - narrower with a rougher, more uneven tread.
- A quality trail system will provide a variety of trail experiences. A small trail system should focus first on trails that meet the needs of the majority of users. 5- Easy Access/Options
- Users need to be able to get from home to trail quickly and start their experience. - The first trail from the trailhead should be an easy trail, wide and smooth - suitable for all users.
- As users delve further into the system, the trails should increase in difficulty. - “Stacked loops” of trails allow users to return by a different route while providing a variety of options.
6- Signage / Mapping
- All trails should be named and signed.
- All trailheads should have an information kiosk.
- Maps should be readily available for all trails.

7- Sustainability & Maintenance
- Trails need to be well maintained.
- Trails designed to sustainable standards require much less maintenance.

UVTG Design and Maintenance Standards
Definitions
Reroute/Realignment – a trail maintenance project that starts and ends on a single existing trail and abandons the trail between those points will be termed a reroute or realignment.

Trail - A trail is specifically designed, designated, developed, and maintained as a recreational corridor for the exclusive use of non-motorized vehicles. It is typically not more than 4 feet wide, unpaved and generally requires users to travel single file.

Use Trail - A Use Trail is a trail that has been created without a planning process and or approval by the repeated historic exploration of users.

Multi-Use Trail - A multi use trail is a trail that is open to non-motorized users including hikers, runners, equestrians, and bicyclists. All trails in the Lake Mendocino property will be multi use unless compelling reasons are presented to necessitate partial closure. (Such as the Shakota trail which is currently closed to equestrians.)
Road - Any transportation corridor designed for motor vehicle use and open to motor vehicle use.

Although roads may be necessary for maintenance, further road building should be avoided and road closures should be pursued where possible. A road may be used for recreation but is not a trail.

Fire Break -Although trails act as small firebreaks and have been known to stop fires and can be used as locations to start backfires, a firebreak is not a trail.

Trail Maintenance and Repair 2 - Maintenance and repair of existing trail is performed to return the trail or trail segment to the standards or conditions to which it was originally designed and built, or to improve it to comply with more current design standards to achieve sustainability. The act of maintenance and repair includes but is not limited to:
- Removal of debris and vegetation from the trail corridor, clearing encroaching brush and grasses, removing rock slides, etc.- Maintenance of trail tread such as filling ruts and entrenchments; reshaping trail bed, repairing trail surface and washouts; installing rip rap; constructing retaining wall or cribbing
- Erosion control and drainage, replacing or installing necessary drainage structures, water bars, culverts; realigning sections of trail to deter erosion or avoid boggy/marshy areas. - Repair or replacement of existing trail structures and features. - Upgrades and short reroutes to improve sustainability and decrease maintenance needs.

Feature – Bermed corners, exaggerated rolling dips, jumps, and mountain bike skill development

stations are collectively referred to as “features.”
Trail tread and slope characteristics

1. Trail Width:

Trail beds shall be built and maintained with a goal of being a minimum of 24 inches wide. Thirty six inches is generally the widest maintainable width for a “backcountry” style trail. .

Topographical, vegetation, or resource constraints may require sections that are less than three feet.

Rationale: Allows users to pass by each other safely.

2. Rolling “Contour” Trails:

Trails shall be built with the contour of the topography (plus or minus 10%) utilizing side-slopes and avoiding flat areas as much as feasible.

Rationale: Building trail along fall lines or in flat areas creates erosion. “Contour” trails allow water to sheet off the trail and flow downhill.

Keeping trails on hillsides keeps them out of flatter, wetter areas. Trails built in wet areas are not sustainable. Users tend to walk along edge of trails, creating trail widening.

Wet areas are more prone to soil compaction and displacement. “Contour trails create changing view sheds that add to the enjoyment of the trail.

3. Average trail grade less than or equal to 10%:

The average slope of the trail will ideally be less than 7% but should all be less than or equal to 10%, some slopes will be greater and some less. Side slope, soil type and natural obstacles will determine the grades for each individual section of trail. Sections that are over 10% should be short and followed by a relatively flat section or grade reversal.

Rationale: Most soil types can withstand up to 10% grades.

Minimizes user-caused erosion.

Allows for possible reroutes at a steeper grade if there is a future problem such as a slide.

Accommodates undulations/grade reversals.

Feels comfortable to most trail users.

Grade reversals after steep sections allow the user to recover from the increased effort.

4. Sustainable trail alignment - Trail grade does not exceed “half-rule”:

The grade of the trail should not be greater than half the grade of the sideslope that the trail traverses.

Rationale: Prevents erosion caused by water flowing down the trail rather than flowing down the hillside.

Guides individual trail planning segments to fit the topography.

5. Maximum trail grades should be less than 15%:

Rationale: Although this rule might occasionally need to be broken, at least for short segments of trail, most of the existing trails in the Ukiah Valley are sustainable up to a grade of 15%. Higher grades, especially in areas exposed to weather, have suffered more erosion and damage from users.

6. Incorporation of grade reversals:

Trails should incorporate frequent grade reversals every 10 to 50 feet, depending on soil type and topography.

Rationale: Grade reversals provide areas for water to drain off of trails. As trails age, the shape of the trail bed tends to become concave, leading to the trapping of water. Grade reversals divide the trail into short, individual watersheds.

7. Build in outslope:

Outer edges of trails shall be built and maintained so that they create an approximate 3-5% slope from the inner edge of the trail.

Rationale: Allows water to sheet off of trail, decreasing erosion.

8. Build in backslope:

Depending on soil stability and composition, the area uphill of the trail shall be sloped extending upward from the trail.

Rationale: Prevents a waterfall effect from water coming down the hill and dropping onto the trail tread.

9. Incorporate Features:

Some trails may be designed to include features including bermed corners, exaggerated rolling dips, jumps, and mountain bike skill development stations.

Rationale: Including trail features is highly desired by Mounatain Bike Riders and is necessary to promote tourism.

10. Harden areas subject to erosion:

Some trails will erode regardless of best practice design and construction. When trail use and conditions lead to the formation of “troughs” or require frequent trail tread repair, adding base rock or concrete pavers may be required.

Rationale: When necessary, hardening of trails will decrease sedimentation and maintenance costs.

11. Water Crossings:

Water crossings should be avoided when possible. Trails shall be designed, built, and maintained to minimize sedimentation in streams. Bridges shall be the ideal with puncheons, culverts or “hardening” being considered should resource limitations, infrequent water flow, or low use combine to make a bridge impractical. Prioritization of water crossings should be considered with high use crossings receiving first resources.

Rationale: Minimize impacts to the stream channel and environment.

Create a safe and sustainable passages for trail users.

Work within limits of resource availability and predicted impacts.

12. Tree Cutting/Care:

Prudent efforts to avoid cutting trees should be made in routing the trail. Greater care should be extended with older and/or slow growing trees and shrubs. Dirt excavated from the trail bed should be distributed and not allowed to mass at the base of trees. All efforts should be made to avoid

cutting roots greater than 4” in diameter. Generally, a trail should not be located on the downhill slope within 2 feet of the base of oaks greater than 2 feet in diameter.

Rationale: Minimize disruption to the vegetation along trail.

Protect the health of vegetation along trail

13. Pruning
Pruning vegetation is an essential and regular part of trail maintenance, especially in brushy chaparral areas. Equestrian trails should have 10' vertical clearance while hiking/biking trails can be maintained with 7’ clearance. Greater than four foot horizontal clearance should be avoided as it creates unnecessary disruption and decreases the aesthetic of the trail experience.

Attempts should be made to ensure that pruned branches are distributed in a natural manner with the cut ends away from the trail. Pruning should be done sensitively so that the trail appears natural. Prune to the collar of any branch stem for the health of the shrub and a more natural looking result. At the base of any branch there is a wide section that contains a plant's natural healing agents. Any pruning performed away from this collar will expose the plant to a greater risk of infection. A cut at the collar will naturally heal. For large branches over 2" in diameter, cut from the bottom, then cut down from the top. This prevents tearing of the bark, reducing infection.

Rationale: Maintain safe sight lines along trail.

Protect the health of the vegetation.

Maintain a naturally aesthetic setting.

14. References:

The following references will be used as resources to establish best practices and resolve questions not covered in the above. Additional references will be added upon availability.

Birchard, William & Proudman, Robert 2000 Appalachian Trail: Design, Construction, and Maintenance. 2nd Edition Appalachian Trail Conference Harper’s Ferry WV Birkby, Robert. 2005 Lightly on the Land: The SCA Trail Building and Maintenance Manual. 2nd edition. The Mountaineers Books. Seattle WA ISBN
Demrow, Carl & Salisbury, David 1998. The Complete Guide to Trail Building and Maintenance, 3rd Edition. Appalachian Mountain Club Books. Boston, MA ISBN1-878239-54-6 Felton, Vernon. 2004 Trail Solutions; How to Build Sweet Single Track. Johnson Printing, boulder CO ISBN 0-9755023-0-1
Parker, Troy Scott, 2004. Natural Surface Trails by Design. NatureShape, Boulder,CO. ISBN0- 9755872-0-X
Steinholz, Robert & Vachowski, Brian. 2001. Wetland Trail Design and Construction. USDA Forest Service Technology and Development Program Misoula, MT 8E82A3 Weaver W., Weppner E., Hagans, D; Handbook for Forest, Ranch, & Rural Roads (2015).

Mendocino County Resource Conservation District
Weber, Peter(Ed). 2007 Managing Mountain Biking: IMBA’s Guide to Providing Great Riding International Mountain Biking Association. Boulder CO ISBN978-9755023-1-X

i
Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails:

Concept Plan Review
Prepared on behalf of The City of Ukiah, CA
September 3, 2025
Primary Author:

Jon Schubbe, Schubbe Consulting, Copper Harbor, MI
Reviewed by:

Neil Davis, Community Services Director, City of Ukiah, CA Acknowledgements:

Sean White, Director of Sewer & Water, City of Ukiah, CA Attachment E

ii
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ii
Purpose 1
Introduction & Overview 1
Site Visit Summary 2
Project Area Description 2
Soils 4
Vegetation 5
Existing Infrastructure 7
Trail System Description 8
Gateway Zone 8
Lookout Peak Zone 9
Next Steps Toward Implementation 11
Construction Estimate 12

1 Purpose
This document describes a conceptual, native-tread, soft-surface singletrack network near Ukiah, California, in Mendocino County. Its purpose is to establish a baseline plan to guide trail design and construction. It outlines the landscape’s challenges and opportunities for trail development and identifies the next steps needed to move the project successfully from concept through design and into construction.

This document is not intended to serve as a comprehensive technical or legal environmental review as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or other state regulations.

Introduction & Overview
The City of Ukiah, California (“the City”), in collaboration with the Ukiah Valley Trail Group (UVTG), is leading the development of approximately 20.62 miles of shared-use and bikeoptimized singletrack trails within an 800+ acre area of mountainous terrain owned and managed by the City, west of Doolan Canyon Drive. Collectively, these trails are referred to as the Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails.

The Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails are designed to serve residents, visitors, and recreational events. Natural-surface singletrack will accommodate walkers, hikers, trail runners, and mountain bikers. With nearly 2,000 feet of vertical relief and steep hillsides, the project area is best suited for intermediate and advanced trails. While the landscape could accommodate expert-level routes, no expert trails are included in the plan at the time of publication. Trails will primarily feature native tread, constructed from onsite materials and designed to blend into the natural environment.

The trail system is divided into two distinct concept zones:

Gateway Zone – Situated at the lower elevations of the project area, the Gateway Zone is organized into a stacked loop configuration consisting of upper and lower loops totaling approximately 3.71 miles. This zone includes two trailheads: the Doolan Canyon Drive Primary Trailhead and the Helen Avenue Staircase Trailhead. Trails in the Gateway Zone are envisioned to be of intermediate difficulty and provide primary access to the larger system. The configuration will allow users to make a shorter loop, catering to those who may not have the time or ability to take on an adventure into the Lookout Peak Zone Lookout Peak Zone – Occupying the higher-elevation portion of the project area, the Lookout Peak Zone contains the majority of the planned trails, totaling approximately 16.91 miles. Trails here are primarily of advanced difficulty and are configured in an all-mountain, traverse style.

This design allows riders to ascend to the Lookout Peak ridgeline, complete a loop around the

2 summit zone, and descend back to the Gateway Zone on a different route. A mid-mountain traverse trail is also planned, offering users the ability to create shorter loops or more varied routes. Additionally, adventurous riders will have the option to descend on a gravity trail dedicated to cyclists.

Together, the Gateway and Lookout Peak zones form a cohesive trail system that provides diverse opportunities for outdoor recreation while showcasing the rugged terrain, scenic vistas and natural character of the West Hills.

Site Visit Summary
Jon Schubbe of Schubbe Consulting conducted a site visit to the project area on January 27– 30, 2025. The survey relied primarily on pedestrian reconnaissance of the greater project area, supplemented by windshield reconnaissance using a side-by-side (SxS) and a medium pickup truck to cover the road and fire break network.

During the visit, positive and negative control points were documented using GPS and photography:
● Positive control points included suitable stream or drainage crossing locations, scenic overlooks, unique forest stands, unique geology and areas appropriate for berm placement.
● Negative control points included impassable or excessively steep terrain (particularly near crossings), dense vegetation zones, areas of erosion associated with historic fire break construction and grow sites.

Findings from this site visit provide the baseline field data used to inform the shared-use trail concept alignments, technical assessments of the project area, and design considerations presented in this report.

Project Area Description
The Project Area is located in the “West Hills,” which form the western slopes of Ukiah Valley.

Its boundaries form an irregular, multi-sided polygon that generally encompasses the Lookout Peak Summit, a prominent ridgeline descending from the summit toward Redwood Drive, and a portion of the Doolan Creek headwaters. Vertical relief ranges from approximately 740 feet at the Doolan Canyon Drive Trailhead to 2,700 feet at the summit.

The Lookout Peak Summit zone consists of an alpine parkland-type landscape, where multiple summits occur as subtle rises along the ridgeline. The ridgeline itself is relatively flat and is traversed by a single-lane fire road, with slopes dropping steeply to either side. The main fire

3 road follows the summit ridgeline and provides access to several dead-end spur roads that extend along prominent ridgelines descending to the south and north of the summit zone.

Below the summit, the landscape is characterized by steep slopes shaped by radial and dendritic ravines, valleys, and canyons. Slopes reflect the mountainous character of the terrain and often range between 45% and 65%. Slopes exceeding 65% are common. Zones between 10% and 45% are present but do not occupy significant portions of the Project Area, while slopes of less than 10% are largely absent, occurring only in “passes” or where fire roads flatten at grade transitions.

Exposed rock is relatively uncommon but was observed along ridgelines and on the southeastfacing slopes below the summit. These areas of exposed rock are generally associated with slopes greater than 65%.

The Project Area includes the headwaters of Doolan Creek, located south of Lookout Peak Summit. The southern portion of the Project Area also encompasses a segment of the Doolan Creek channel itself, along with adjacent hillsides and canyon walls. A prominent, unnamed ephemeral stream and valley are present in the northern portion of the Project Area. The Project Area further includes a small portion of the Gibson Creek Watershed, which drains the north side of Lookout Peak.

Exposed & Difficult Terrain
A zone of particularly steep slopes and steep exposed rock is present in the southern portion of the project area, along Doolan Creek. Due to the challenging terrain, and abundance of more suitable terrain elsewhere (uphill) in the project area, this area is not considered for trails at this time.

Additional scouting may identify viable routes to access this scenic and rugged zone in the future.

Boulders & Rocks
Native boulders and rock outcrops are primarily confined to stream channels and areas of concentrated flow. Where present, most material falls within size classes that can be managed by hand crews or with a mini-excavator. Outside of these channels, surface rock and large boulders are relatively uncommon and are not expected to pose significant challenges during trail design or construction.

Design and Construction Ramifications Related to Terrain & Rocks Many areas of the project area fall between 45% and 65% side slopes with some zones exceeding 65%. Foot travel becomes difficult due to the extreme steepness of slopes.

Construction is also typically more challenging due to this exposure to elevation.

4 Rocky terrain, large boulders, scree fields or bedrock is not anticipated to reduce the efficiency of design or construction.

Soils
The predominant soil classes within the Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trail Project Area are the Hopland-Wohly loams (Map Unit 151) and the Maymen-Etsel-Snook complex (Map Unit 160).

According to the USDA Web Soil Survey (USDA WSS), these soils occur on steep mountainous slopes ranging from 30 to 75 percent, which reflects onsite observations. Hopland and Wohly loams are moderately deep, well-drained soils formed in sedimentary rock, while the Maymen, Etsel, and Snook soils are shallow to moderately deep, well-drained soils derived from metamorphic parent material. Together, these two map units account for a significant portion of the Project Area.

Other soil map units present across the Project Area include the Witherell-Hopland-Ashokawna complex, Hopland loam (50–75% slopes), Yorkville-Yorktree-Ashokawna complex, and Cummiskey gravelly loam. These soils are also mapped on steep slopes and are characterized by loamy or gravelly surface horizons over shallow or moderately deep subsoils. Other minor soil types are likely present, at low acreages, within the project area.

Design and Construction Ramifications Related to Soil
Soils within the Project Area are primarily loams and gravelly loams on steep slopes. Loamtextured soils, such as those in the Hopland-Wohly and Hopland units, typically compact well during trail construction to provide a stable tread surface when properly drained. Gravelly loams, such as the Cummiskey and Ashokawna complexes, also compact adequately, though their coarse fragments may cause them to break down more quickly. In these areas, capping or armoring may be incorporated into design to ensure a sustainable and user-friendly trail surface.

In contrast, soils within the Maymen-Etsel-Snook complex are shallow and rocky, with limited fine material available to bind the tread. These soils have lower compaction potential and fine particles may get stripped from the soil matrix, particularly on steeper grades. Trail design in these units should anticipate the need to moderate grade, and incorporate frequent grade reversals and drainage features to minimize soil displacement.

To allow for soil texture to be considered during field design and construction, the extent of different soil textures should be mapped and included on field maps for reference during trail flagging.

Overall, compaction potential across the Project Area is moderate to high in loam-dominated units and low to moderate in shallow, rocky complexes. To achieve a durable tread and reduce long-term erosion and maintenance, trail construction will require full-bench excavation, tread outsloping, mechanical compaction, and careful drainage design. Complexes may require capping if loss/movement of fine cohesive particles becomes a serious challenge.

5 Vegetation
Vegetation and Natural Communities
The project area supports a mix of oak woodlands, chaparral, manzanita thickets, and scattered stands of gray pine and redwood. Most of the site remains in a native and relatively undisturbed condition, with vegetation reflecting both the ridgeline parkland setting and the dissected canyons below.

Field surveys conducted in 2024 identified several vegetation types using state and federal classification systems. According to the Holland system, the site falls primarily within Valley and Foothill Grassland and Chamise Chaparral. CALVEG mapping refines this further, identifying Interior Live Oak Alliance and Lower Montane Mixed Chaparral Alliance as dominant. Manual of California Vegetation (MCV2) classifications observed on site include:
● Oak Chaparral (Quercus wislizeni – Quercus chrysolepis Shrubland Alliance):

Dense shrub communities dominated by interior and canyon live oak, often intermixed with chamise, ceanothus, and manzanita.
● Manzanita Chaparral (Arctostaphylos Shrubland Alliance): Mid- to upper-slope chaparral dominated by hoary, common, and Stanford manzanita, sometimes forming extensive old-growth thickets.
● Gray Pine Woodland (Pinus sabiniana Woodland Alliance): Open pine woodland with scattered oaks and buckeye, generally on shallow, rocky soils. Shrubs are common or infrequent.

Additional features include mixed oak stands and small, sparse redwood groves occurring in cooler or more sheltered microsites.

Aspect strongly influences vegetation patterns across the site. South-facing slopes are typically dominated by shrubby species such as chamise and manzanita, reflecting hotter, drier conditions. In contrast, east- and north-facing slopes support closed-canopy woodlands of oak, pine, and occasional redwood, where cooler and moister conditions favor taller tree growth.

Overall, the vegetation provides substantial canopy cover across much of the project area, with many trail segments passing beneath oak and pine woodland or screened by tall chamise and manzanita. Ridge roads are the primary existing clearings, while the remainder of the landscape retains its native character.

No sensitive natural communities, as defined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, were documented within the study area.

6 Invasive Species
Invasive or exotic plant species are mostly limited to Eurasian grasses associated with grasslands and pasturelands. Other invasive species were not found to be widespread. Invasive species are not anticipated to affect design.

To prevent introducing new invasive species and their seeds to the site, contractors should wash all equipment prior to mobilizing onsite.

Thorn Bushes
Thickets of Ceanthus spp were encountered along the Summit Ridgeline, growing in disused fire roads and in overgrown fire breaks.

Poison Oak
Poison Oak was not observed to be abundant in the project area, but is likely present as dispersed individuals, especially in shrub thickets.

Windfall and Hazard Trees
Extensive areas of windfall or with large/expansive log piles were not observed during scouting.

It is very likely some small areas of windfall or small log piles will be encountered during design, but overall, zones with abundant fallen or down timber are not anticipated to significantly impact productivity.

Design Ramifications Related to Vegetation
The vegetation communities present in the project area will directly affect how trail alignments can be identified, flagged, and refined during the design phase. ● Chaparral, Chamise, and Manzanita Stands (Impenetrable Vegetation) These shrub-dominated communities often form nearly solid thickets that are extremely difficult to traverse. In such areas, it may not be feasible to flag alignments directly through vegetation. Instead, control points must be flagged at accessible locations such as ridgelines, drainages, crossings, or other significant features that define trail direction.

Designers may need to rely on topographic mapping, drone images and/or aerial interpretation rather than continuous on-the-ground flagging. ● Closed-Canopy Forest (Oak, Pine, Redwood)
In woodland and mixed forest communities, the understory is typical of low to moderate density, allowing designers to move more freely across the landscape. These conditions permit more detailed flagging of the trail alignment and provide moderate sight lines, which are important for evaluating user experience and controlling grades. Trail layout in

7 these communities is constrained more by scattered mature trees than by dense chaparral.

Existing Infrastructure
A network of fire roads and fire breaks is present within the Project Area. Most notably, a primary fire road extends uphill from Redwood Avenue to reach the summit and continues westward beyond the project boundary. A second access road extends from San Jacinta Drive to the old grow site.

The main trailhead for the project will be accessed from Doolan Canyon Drive, which forms part of the southeastern/eastern project boundary.

Several dead-end spur roads extend from the primary fire road, generally following ridgelines.

Where ridgelines were too steep to accommodate a road, fire breaks have been constructed by bulldozer.

Built infrastructure within the Project Area is limited to a single cell phone tower located midmountain.

Barbed Wire Fence
Barbed wire fence was observed along the project boundary in some locations, but fencelines were not observed within the project area.

Grow-Sites
Many areas within and adjacent to the project area have been used as unregulated cannabis grow sites. At least one known, historic grow site is located in the Gateway Zone, in the general vicinity of Intersection G. Efforts to clean up and restore the known site are in progress. Other unknown sites may exist within the project area. Debris and leftover infrastructure from this grow site, (or any other) is not expected to significantly hamper design or construction, but designers and builders may encounter trash and debris associated with this historic land use. Trash and debris typically includes, plastic piping, plastic sheeting, metal greenhouse hoops, plastic grow pots, soils and fertilizer bottles/bags.

Designers should flag any large debris or trash fields encountered while completing flagging, for further evaluation & consideration.

Utilities and Buried Infrastructure
A repeater station for a cellular network exists along the main fire break, at approximately 2,000’ of elevation. No known restrictions or setbacks are affiliated with this facility and it is not serviced by underground utility lines.

8 Design and Construction Ramifications Related to Existing Infrastructure The existing roadway and fire break infrastructure will be valuable during both design and construction. The entire ridge line fire road is accessible to 4x4 vehicles, which will help improve efficiency of design, since long distances will not have to be walked to access the trail alignment.

Trail System Description
The Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails are organized into two primary zones totaling approximately 20.62 miles: the Gateway Zone at lower elevations and the Lookout Peak Zone at higher elevations. Each zone contains multiple trail segments intended to provide a range of user experiences.

Gateway Zone (~3.7 miles)
Lower Loop – Segments 101 & 102 (~1.1 miles)
Originates at the Doolan Canyon Drive Primary Trailhead. This loop provides the main access into the system by connecting the trailhead with Intersection A. The alignment follows moderate slopes, weaving through mixed oak woodland.
● Challenges
○ Locating suitable berm sites.
○ Managing proximity to private property boundaries.
○ Maintaining sustainable grades on short, steeper pitches, especially near trailhead.
● Opportunities
○ Shaded corridors beneath tree canopy.
○ Convenient neighborhood connections to the trailhead via Doolan Canyon Drive.

Upper Loop – Segments 201 & 202 (~2.4 miles)
Extends from the Lower Loop and climbs into steeper terrain to form a stacked loop network, by connecting Intersections A and B. The route traverses mixed oak and pine woodlands, with some open-canopy areas on south-facing slopes.
● Challenges
○ Constrained corridor near property boundaries.
○ Steep hillsides above Intersection A, especially along Segment 202.

9 ○ Dense shrub zones in south-facing oak forests.
● Opportunities
○ Varied trail character across woodland and open-slope environments. ○ Scenic overlook and gathering space at the former grow site.

Helen Avenue Staircase Connector – Segment 103 (~0.13 miles) Provides secondary access to Segment 101 from Helen Avenue via an existing public alley right-of-way.
● Challenges
○ Proximity to adjacent residences.
○ Steep terrain requiring stair construction for a sustainable alignment. ● Opportunities
○ Enhanced walkable access from nearby neighborhoods.
○ Dedicated hiker/walker connection.

Lookout Peak Zone (Approx. 16.9 miles)
Connector Trail – Segment 301 (~0.8 miles)
Main two-way connection between Intersection B in the Gateway Zone and Intersection C in the Lookout Peak Zone.
● Challenges
○ Property boundary constraints.
○ Grade management while reaching stream crossings.
○ Dense, nearly impenetrable chamise on south-facing slopes. ● Opportunities
○ Multiple suitable stream crossing sites.
○ Scenic views near Intersection C.

South Ascent/Descent Trails – Segments 401, 402 & 403 (~5.65 miles) Connect Intersection C (1,250’ el.) and Intersection F (2,700’ el.) via Intersections D and E, forming the southern link between the base of the Lookout Peak Zone and the Summit Loop. ● Challenges

10 ○ Berm siting on steep slopes.
○ Dense understory and shrubby vegetation.
● Opportunities
○ Natural topography that supports grade reversals.
○ Scenic overlooks.

Summit Loop – Segments 501 & 502 (~3.5 miles)
Circles the Lookout Peak ridgeline, connecting Intersections F and G. Terrain includes oak woodland on west/north slopes and chaparral/chamise on south/east slopes. ● Challenges
○ Limited vegetation cues to aid grading on exposed slopes. ○ Wind exposure.
○ Limited shade on south-facing aspects.
● Opportunities
○ 360-degree views.
○ A signature destination loop at the summit.

North Ascent/Descent Trails – Segments 601 & 602 (~3.6 miles) Connect Intersection G (2,600’ el.) and Intersection C (1,250’ el.) via Intersection H, forming the northern link between the Summit Loop and lower elevations. ● Challenges
○ Constrained corridor between the northern project area boundary, main access road and ridgeline.
○ Berm siting on steep slopes.
○ Grade management near Intersection G.
● Opportunities
○ Long, sustained climbs.
○ Panoramic views.

Mid-Mountain Traverse – Segments 701 & 702 (~1.1 miles) Contours across the slope below the summit, connecting Intersection E with Intersection H via Intersection I.

11 ● Challenges
○ Thick shrubby vegetation limiting corridor access.
● Opportunities
○ Appealing closed-canopy forest corridors.
○ Multiple loop and route linkage options for users that help disperse use and provide for engaging experiences.

Gravity Trail (Bike-Only Descent) – Segments 801 & 802 (~2.1 miles) Bike optimized descent trail linking Intersection G (2,600’ el.) and the Summit Zone with Intersection D (1,770’ el.) via Intersection I.
● Challenges
○ Dense chamise and manzanita clearing.
○ Berm and switchberm sitting on steep slopes.
○ Grade management near Intersection G.
● Opportunities
○ Flow-oriented design with speed control and safety features. ○ A signature gravity experience for advanced riders.

Next Steps Toward Implementation
To advance the Lookout Peak Shared-Use Trails from concept to shovel-ready, the following technical tasks are required:

Field Flagging/Design
● Complete detailed, on-site field flagging of trail alignments. ● Verify grades, drainage crossings, and control points such as intersections & berms under on-site conditions.
● Identify appropriate build techniques
● Adjust concept alignments as needed to consider unforeseen circumstances and optimize flow.
● Prepare Design Overview Figure & Detailed Design Figures to aid with bidding and construction.

Novel Design Techniques
In areas of dense chaparral and manzanita, continuous flagging of the trail corridor may not be feasible. In such cases, control points should be flagged at ridgelines, crossing

12 locations, and where feasible at proposed berm locations. This ensures that viable crossings can be selected and that grades can be managed by measuring distance and elevation change between control points.

Where continuous flag lines cannot be established, high-resolution, spatially controlled drone imagery should be used as a supplemental reference for construction contractors.

This approach increases the risk of unforeseen conditions during construction; however, given the general absence of extensive boulder fields or rock outcrops in the project area, such issues are not anticipated to be significant.

Engineering Drawings
● Prepare typical plan and profile drawings for all trail building techniques prescribed during flagging.
● Include typical design details for crossings, drainage structures, retaining features, and specialized trail elements (berms, switchberms, gravity trail features). ● Include basic schematic drawings depicting intersection configuration.

Design Manual
● Develop a project-specific design and construction manual to accompany guide contractors and volunteer crews.
● Document construction standards, specifications for native tread, compaction, drainage, and vegetation management.

Bid Package (If Required)
● If construction will be publicly bid, prepare a bid package including drawings, specifications, and a basis of payment document.
● Provide pay item descriptions and quantities to support contractor pricing and payment applications.

Construction Estimate
Construction Estimate by Segment
Segment Miles Premium Low ($) Med ($) High ($)
Lower Loop: 101–102 1.10 +25% 55,000 68,750 82,500

13 Upper Loop: 201–202 2.40 +25% 120,000 150,000 180,000 Helen Stairs 103 (*includes stairs) 0.13 — 24,000 36,000 48,000 Connector: 301 0.80 0% 32,000 40,000 48,000
South Ascent/Decent 401–403 5.65 0% 226,000 282,500 339,000 Summit Loop 501–502 3.50 0% 140,000 175,000 210,000
North Ascent/Decent 601–602 3.60 +25% 180,000 225,000 270,000 Mid Traverse 701–702 1.10 0% 44,000 55,000 66,000
Gravity Trail 801–802 2.10 +50% 126,000 157,500 189,000 Mileage reconciliation (0.24 mi) 0.24 0% 9,600 12,000 14,400 Subtotal – Trail Construction
(~20.62 mi)
— — 956,600 1,201,750 1,446,900
Supporting Elements
Item Basis Low ($) Med ($) High ($)
Design & Engineering 8% / 9% / 10% of construction
subtotal
76,528 108,158 144,690
Wayfinding & Signage $2k / $3k / $4k per mile × 20.62 mi 41,240 61,860 82,480 Total Estimated Cost
● Low: 956,600 + 41,240 + 76,528 = $1,075,000 (rounded) ● Med: 1,201,750 + 61,860 + 108,158 = $1,372,000 (rounded)

14 ● High: 1,446,900 + 82,480 + 144,690 = $1,675,000 (rounded)

15 Appendix A - Concept Map

16

Attachment F – Fire Hardened Trails

SCOPE OF WORK
Western Hills Watershed Protection Area Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan �
Project Background and Statement of Need
The Western Hills Watershed Protection Area (WHWPA) extends from the valley floor at 760 feet to its highest point at Lookout Peak at 2,726 feet in elevation. Overall, the WHWPA is steep with slopes ranging from 30-70 percent. The vegetation is overgrown in some locations and wildfire has been suppressed for decades. Looking to the west from the highest ridge, views of Pine Mountain and the headwaters of Robinson Creek can be seen.

Looking to the east provides views of Lake Mendocino, the Ukiah Valley, and the mountain tops of Sanhedrin, Hull, Snow, Red, and Konocti Mountains. Two forks of Doolin Creek flow east out of the central and southern parts of the WHWPA. The headwaters of Gibson Creek lie in the northwesternmost corner of the WHWPA and an unnamed creek in the northeastern parcel of the WHWPA flows east toward Hillcrest Avenue.

The WHWPA Management Plan (2024) identifies road and forest management needs but provides no “Scope of Work” specifics. Objective 3 of the plan outlines the need to control erosion, protect water quality, and maintain facilities. This objective requires that road work be in accord with the Handbook for Forest, Ranch, & Rural Roads (2015). Objective 11 of the plan identifies the need for routine vegetation control to maintain safe ingress and egress and create a safe environment for current and future property uses. Decades of fire suppression have led to increasingly dense and unhealthy western forests.

Redwood Avenue extends past a locked gate crossing approximately a quarter mile of private property before heading up hill and due east along the main ridge line at the center of the WHWPA. A number of secondary roads and old fire breaks combine for a total of five and a half miles of roads and fire breaks that require maintenance.

These roads are an asset to firefighting as well as a liability, due to fire risks associated with road use. The community of Ukiah as well as outlying rural communities to the north, south and east, benefit from fire suppression opportunities provided along the ridgeline; however maintenance of these roads and fire breaks is needed to ensure safe access during a fire event, due to fuel loading as well as the present condition of the running surface of the road. Facilities including public schools, parks, and county offices are concentrated at the east end of the boundary of the WHWPA. These make the roads and fire breaks of the WHWPA a key resource in defense of these assets. Additionally, Nokomis Elementary would be a potentially useful staging area for suppression resources, further enhancing the strategic value of this ridge system.

Maintenance Project Goals
Attachment G

SCOPE OF WORK
Western Hills Watershed Protection Area Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan �
The primary objectives of this WHWPA maintenance plan are to assure existing roads and fire breaks are open and available to emergency personnel and vehicles, forest lands are thinned of hazardous deadfall, shaded fuel breaks along roads are maintained, and the area is safe for future anticipated public access.

The project area includes oak and mixed hardwood forests that have overgrown to an unhealthy degree. Clusters of knobcone pines have died from old age and create a hazard.

Project Area and Measures to Avoid Adverse Impacts
• Project activities will be limited to the ~760 acres of the Western Hills Watershed Protection Area.
• No work will be done under this management plan within 50 feet of a class III or higher flow stream.
• No work will be done during the blooming period of Lilium rubescens (Redwood Lily) and until after it has naturally dispersed seed (May 15-June 30th) unless a survey has been performed and no Lilys are present.
• From April 1st to August 31st nesting bird surveys will be conducted prior to any project activities.
• Clearing of deadfall trees will ensure that a minimum of 6 “snags” per acre remain to provide habitat.

Proposed Activities
1) Road Work: Clearing of encroaching vegetation with hand crews, dozers, or masticators will assure safe ingress and egress for routine maintenance, site monitoring, and emergency access. Grading and shaping of the running surface of the road will be required to keep the roads open and available for emergency access and to manage erosion. The City Engineer or designated staff may identify additional necessary repair needs, such as deep ruts, failing fill, or inadequate drainage features. Road work be in accord with the Handbook for Forest, Ranch, & Rural Roads (2015).
2) Hand Crew - Understory Thinning/Brushing To Promote Healthy Growth: Manual thinning of understory bush and ladder fuels will be conducted by hand crews.

Lop and scatter and piling material in the unit will process most of the biomass.

Some material, where feasible, will be staged on a landing where it will be processed by grinder or left for later burning. This activity can be conducted year-round.

SCOPE OF WORK
Western Hills Watershed Protection Area Road and Fire Break Maintenance Plan �
3) Piling, Burning: Where feasible, understory fuels including brush, small trees, and invasive species removed in manual thinning units will be piled in-unit and burned during wetter months (September through March).
4) Chipping/Hauling: When feasible slash will be staged at landings and will be processed by a grinder and spread on the site or at other City owned locations. 5) Dead Tree Removal: Clusters of dead trees (primarily knobcone pines) will be felled to improve safety of the area and ensure roads remain unblocked. A cluster of trees is a grouping or three or more trees wherein one falling tree may hit another dead tree. Dead trees that risk falling and blocking an access road or fuel break may also be felled. Felled trees will be limbed up with slash treated as in sections 2-4 above. 6) Vegetation Management Plan Development: City staff will begin the process of developing and submitting a Vegetation Management Plan for the WHWPA to cover more intensive fuel reduction strategies such as controlled burns and mastication. 7) Maintenance of Medevac Landing Zones: In feasible locations, flat areas that have already been cleared of brush for historic reasons will be maintained as flat (less than 10 degrees), firm, and clear for at least 75’x75’ (100’ x 100’ if possible), to allow medevac helicopter landing.

Prepared For:

Neil Davis
Ukiah Valley Trails
842 Valley View Dr.

Ukiah, CA 95482
APN: Multiple
Prepared by
Jacobszoon &
Associates,Inc.

Alicia Ives Ringstad
Senior Wildlife Biologist
[email protected]
Jessenya Rivas
Wildlife Biologist
[email protected]
Date: August 28, 2024
Biological Assessment
Report
Attachment H

Table of Contents
Section 1.0: Project Description ..................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Summary of Findings............................................................................................................. 4 Section 2.0: Regulations and Descriptions...................................................................................... 4

2.1 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Natural Communities and Sensitive Natural Communities ................................................... 5

2.3 Special-Status Species........................................................................................................... 5 Section 3.0: Field Survey Methodology ......................................................................................... 5

3.1 Assessment Methods ............................................................................................................. 5

3.2 Database and Resource Assessments..................................................................................... 6

3.3 Special-status Species............................................................................................................ 7

3.4 Critical Habitat ...................................................................................................................... 8

3.5 Natural Communities............................................................................................................. 8

3.5.1 Non-sensitive Biological Communities ........................................................................... 9

3.5.2 Sensitive Biological Communities................................................................................... 9

3.5.3 Wetlands........................................................................................................................ 10

3.5.4 Streams, Rivers and Anadromous Fish Habitat ............................................................ 11 Section 4.0: Study Area Setting.................................................................................................... 11

4.1 Climate and Hydrology........................................................................................................ 11

4.2 Topography and Soils.......................................................................................................... 11

4.3 Biota and Land Use.............................................................................................................. 12 Section 5.0: Field Survey Results................................................................................................. 12

5.1 Natural Communities........................................................................................................... 12

5.1.1 Non-sensitive Natural Communities.............................................................................. 13

5.1.2 Sensitive Natural Communities..................................................................................... 15

5.2 Aquatic Resources............................................................................................................... 15

5.3 Special-status Species.......................................................................................................... 15

5.3.1 Special-status Plant Species.......................................................................................... 15

5.3.2 Special-status Plant Species.......................................................................................... 23 Section 6.0: Assessment Summary and Recommendations.......................................................... 31

6.1 Biological Communities...................................................................................................... 31

6.2 Special-status Species.......................................................................................................... 32

6.2.1 Special-status Plant Species.......................................................................................... 32

6.2.2 Special-status Wildlife Species...................................................................................... 32

6.3 Wildlife Corridors................................................................................................................ 34

6.4 Critical Habitat .................................................................................................................... 34 Section 7.0: References................................................................................................................. 35 Appendix A: Table of Potential for Special-Status Plants and Wildlife within the Study Area…42 Appendix B: List of Species Observed ........................................................................................ 79 Appendix C: Photographs............................................................................................................ 83 Appendix D: Maps....................................................................................................................... 88 Map 1: Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................... 89 Map 2: Study Area-Imagery.............................................................................................. 90 Map 3: Study Area-Topographic ....................................................................................... 91 Map 4: CAL Vegetation Cover Type ................................................................................ 92 Map 5: CNDDB Vicinity................................................................................................... 93 Map 6: USGS Soil Survey................................................................................................. 94 Map 7: National Watershed Inventory .............................................................................. 97 Map 8: National Floodplain Hazard Rating....................................................................... 98 Map 9: MCV2 Habitat Classification ................................................................................ 99 Appendix E: Supporting Documents.......................................................................................... 100 USFWS Information for Planning and Consulting.......................................................... 101 CDFW Rarefind Inventory.............................................................................................. 116 CNPS Rare Plant Inventory ……………………………………………………………… 120

Section 1.0: Project Description
Jacobszoon & Associates, Inc. has performed a Biological Assessment (BA) and Botanical Survey (BS) for Ukiah Valley Trails- Doolin Ridge Trail Expansion in Ukiah, CA, 95482, (Appendix D: Map 1, Vicinity, Map 2, Study Area-Imagery, & Map 3, Study Area-Topographic) for a trail expansion project.

The purpose of this study was to identify any special-status plants and special-status animal habitats within the Study Area to determine if they would be directly or potentially impacted by the project. The Study Area referred to in this report is contained within multiple parcels, comprising approximately 833 acres.

1.1 Summary of Findings
The BA and BS were conducted on April 17th, April 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024, by Jacobszoon and Associates, Inc.’s Biologists Nicolas Morat, Jessenya Rivas, Jamie Beckett, and Airica Gallaspy. During the assessment, the habitat was classified under three (3) MCV2 classification systems:
(1) Quercus wislizeni-Quercus chrysolepis (shrub) Shrubland Alliance, (2) Avena ssp.- Bromus ssp.

Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance, and (3) Pinus sabiniana Woodland Alliance (Appendix D: Map 9, MCV2 Habitat Classifications). These communities are considered non-sensitive and thus require no special protection. No (0) sensitive biological communities were identified.

Three (3) watercourses flow through the Study Area including Doolin Creek, a Class I watercourse, and two unnamed Class III watercourses. All three (3) watercourses are classified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) (Appendix D: Map 7, National Watershed Inventory) as a Riverine System which includes all wetland and deepwater habitats contained within a channel. The Study Area has a 100-Year Flood Zone hazard rating of moderate according to the FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) (Appendix D: Map 8, NFHL 100-Year Flood Zone).

The BA and BS were conducted during the blooming period for all special-status species listed with a moderate or high potential to be present in the Study Area. No (0) special status plants or wildlife were observed within the Study Area.

Section 2.0: Regulations and Descriptions

2.1 Regulatory Setting
The project shall comply with Federal, State, and local regulations designed to protect sensitive natural resources. The following natural resources are protected under one or more of several Federal and/or State regulations and should be considered when designing and/or implementing the project within the Study Area:

Streams, Lakes, and Riparian Habitat: protected under the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW):
• Includes creeks and rivers (bodies where water flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life), and vegetation adjacent to and associated with (riparian habitat).

Waters of the State: protected under the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).

Waters of the U.S.: protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA), administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps):
• Includes wetlands, streams, rivers, and other aquatic habitats meeting the guidance issued by the Corps.

2.2 Natural Communities and Sensitive Natural Communities Sensitive Natural Communities: protected under the California Fish and Game Code, administered by CDFW (CDFW 2024):
• Includes terrestrial vegetation or plant communities that are ranked by NatureServe and considered “threatened” or “endangered” by CDFW, lists of such are included in List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (CDFW 2024).

2.3 Special-Status Species
Special-status Plant and Wildlife Species including Critical Habitat: protected under one or more of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and/or CDFW:
• Includes plants listed under the ESA and/or CESA, or those plants ranked by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as Rank 1, 2, 3 and 4.
• Includes wildlife listed under the ESA and/or CESA, and wildlife listed by CDFW as Species of Special Concern, Fully Protected Species, and/or Special status including Invertebrates, Birds of Conservation Concern listed by USFWS, Species of Concern listed by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Western Bat Working Group (WBWG).

Section 3.0: Field Survey Methodology

3.1 Assessment Methods
The BA is designed to assess the potential for the presence of sensitive wildlife species and to determine whether habitat for sensitive plant species and plant communities may or may not be present within the Study Area. This includes the analysis and comparison of existing habitat conditions within the Study Area and the documented range and habitat requirements of sensitive plant and wildlife species described in CDFW’s California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (CWHR).

Field surveys (biological and botanical) were conducted by Jacobszoon and Associates, Inc. to identify and delineate potential sensitive habitats within the Study Area. The Study Area was assessed to document: (1) the on-site plant communities, (2) existing conditions and their ability to provide suitable habitat for any special-status plant or wildlife species, and (3) if sensitive biological communities (e.g., wetlands, vernal pools) are present.

Plant species observed during the site assessment were recorded and are listed in Appendix B. Plants listed in Appendix B were identified using The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California 2nd

Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012) to the taxonomic level necessary to determine rarity. The names provided in this biological assessment report follow The Jepson Flora Project (JFP April 2024). The BA and BS were conducted during the blooming period for all special-status species listed with a moderate or high potential to be present in the Study Area. No (0) special status plants were observed within the Study Area.

3.2 Database and Resource Assessments
Prior to conducting field surveys, available reference materials were reviewed, including the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the USFWS NWI, the Ukiah 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle topographic maps, and the most recent available aerial imagery. The 100-year flood zone was assessed using the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) NFHL. The location of streams and watercourses within the project vicinity were reviewed using datasets from California Streams and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).

The potential for occurrences of rare, threatened, endangered or plant and animal species of concern within or near the Study Area were evaluated by reviewing the Ukiah, Orr Springs, and Elledge Peak, Laughlin Range, Redwood Valley, Potter Valley, Cow Mountain, Boonville, and Purdys Gardens 7.5 minute quadrangles topographic maps, aerial photography, California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v9.5), CDFW’s Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Spotted Owl Data, CWHR, RareFind 5 and Quick Viewer Bios 6 processed and unprocessed data (online edition, v6.24.0604).

The CNPS database produces a list of sensitive plants potentially occurring at a site based on various site characteristics: location of the Study Area with regard to the geographic range of sensitive plant species, location(s) of known populations of sensitive plant species as mapped in the CNDDB, soils of the Study Area, elevation, presence/absence of special habitat features (vernal pools, serpentine/volcanic soils, etc.) and plant communities existing within the Study Area. While use of the CNPS inventory does not eliminate the need for an in-season botanical survey, it can, when used in conjunction with other information, provide a very good indication of the suitability of a site as habitat for sensitive plant species. The CNDDB consists of mapped overlays of all known populations of sensitive plants and wildlife. The database is continuously updated with new sensitive species population data.

Potential occurrence of special-status plants and wildlife in the Study Area was determined by identifying special-status species that could occur within the vicinity of the Study Area or in similar communities through a literature and database search (Appendix A).

A list of target plant and animal species with potential to occur in the Study Area was generated, which guided subsequent field surveys. During the site visit, existing habitat conditions were evaluated and used to assess the potential for presence of special-status species. The potential for each special-status species to occur in the Study Area was then evaluated according to the following criteria:

No Potential: Habitat on and adjacent to the Study Area is clearly unsuitable for the species requirements (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime).

Low Potential: Few of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or the majority of habitat on and adjacent to the Study Area is unsuitable or of very poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on-site.

Moderate Potential: Some of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or only some of the habitat on or adjacent to the Study Area is suitable. The species has a moderate probability of being found on-site.

High Potential: All the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present and/or most of the habitat on or adjacent to the Study Area is highly suitable. The species has a high probability of being found on-site.

Present: Species are observed on the site or have been recorded (i.e. CNDDB) on-site recently.

Existing vegetative communities were reviewed using CDFW’s Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP) data for the potential existence and location of sensitive biological communities and related vegetation. Where VegCAMP data was not available, existing vegetative communities were reviewed using USDA Forest Service Classification and Assessment with Landsat of Visible Ecological Groupings (CALVEG) data.

CWHR Predicted Habitat Suitability is a dataset accessed through CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) Commercial/ Spotted Owl Viewer that represents areas of suitable habitat within an animal species ranges based on the CWHR. Habitat suitability ranks of Low (less than

0.34), Medium (0.34-0.66), and High (greater than 0.66) suitability are based on the mean expert opinion suitability value for each habitat type for breeding, foraging, and cover (CDFW 2024). Examination of the CWHR dataset was applied when: 1) the data is available for the species of concern, and 2) when there is a moderate to high potential for an animal to occur on or within 100 feet of the Study Area.

As with all models, these maps are not perfect, and do not predict the occurrence of an organism, it just examines whether the areas being examined in the biological assessment are habitats which may support a species of special concern. This information not only informs the landowner of what may occur on their property, but also assists the biologist when conducting a survey.

3.3 Special-status Species
Special-status plants (native, vascular and non-vascular) and wildlife assessed are of limited abundance in California, with known occurrence or distribution in Mendocino County, and were derived from the following lists:
• Federal listed or threatened or endangered plants or species of concern (FT, FE, FSC) • California State listed or rare, threatened or endangered plants or species of concern (SR, ST, SE, SP, SSC)
• Board of Forestry Sensitive (BFS)
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Status wildlife: Fully Protected, Species of Special Concern and Watch List (FP, SSC, WL)
• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 1A species (plants presumed extirpated in California, and either rare or extinct elsewhere)

• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 1B species (plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere)
• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 2A species (plants presumed extirpated in California but more common elsewhere)
• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 2B species (plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere)
• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 3 (plants which more information is needed- a review list)
• California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) list 4 (plants of limited distribution- a watch list)
Rare, threatened, and endangered plants are not necessarily limited to those species which have been “listed” by state and federal agencies but should include any species that, based on all available data, can be shown to be rare, threatened, and/or endangered under the following definitions:

A species, subspecies, or variety of plant is “endangered” when the prospects of its survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, over-exploitation, predation, competition, or disease. A plant is “threatened” when it is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future in the absence of protection measures. A plant is “rare” when, although not presently threatened with extinction, the species, subspecies, or variety is found in such small numbers throughout its range that it may be endangered if its habitat continues to deteriorate.

Site visits were conducted by Nicolas Morat, Jessenya Rivas, Jamie Beckett, and Airica Gallaspy of Jacobszoon and Associates, Inc. on April 17th, April 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024, for a total of forty-seven (47) survey hours to evaluate potentially suitable habitat characteristics for specialstatus plant and animal species within the Study Area. If a special-status species is observed during the site visit, its presence will be recorded and discussed. All plant and wildlife species observed were recorded and are included in Appendix B.

3.4 Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is a term defined by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as the specific areas within the geographic area, occupied by the species at the time it was listed, that contain the physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of endangered and threatened species and that may need special management or protection. Critical habitat may also include areas that were not occupied by the species at the time of listing but are essential to its conservation.

3.5 Natural Communities
Natural communities present within the Study Area were classified based on existing plant community descriptions described by Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986), USDA Forest Service Classification and Assessment with Landsat of Visible Ecological Groupings (CALVEG) system, and the Manual of California Vegetation Online Edition (MCV2 Alliances, CNPS 2024). The currently accepted vegetation classification system for the state that is standardly used by CDFW, CNPS, and other state and federal agencies, organizations, and consultants for survey and planning purposes is the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV; Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009).

Unlike Holland, this vegetation classification system is based on the standard National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS) and includes alliances (a floristically defined vegetation unit identified by its dominant and/or characteristic species) and associations (the finer level of classification beneath alliance). Although the CNDDB still maintains records of some of the old Holland vegetation types, these types are no longer the accepted standard, and the CDFW Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP) has published more recent vegetation lists for the state based on a standardized vegetation classification system that is currently being developed for California and which is consistent with the MCV classification system. Global and state rarity rankings have been assigned for various types on the recent VegCAMP lists.

3.5.1 Non-sensitive Biological Communities
CEQA and other state, federal, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances do not provide special protection for non-sensitive natural communities. Some of these communities may provide suitable habitat for some special-status plant or wildlife species, and are described in section 5.1, if present within the Study Area.

3.5.2 Sensitive Biological Communities
Sensitive biological communities include those that are listed in CNDDB as well as MCV2 alliances or associations with state ranks of S1-S3. Aquatic resources (e.g., watercourses, ponds, wetlands, vernal pools, etc.) are also considered sensitive biological communities and are afforded special protections under CEQA and other Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. Sources for assessing sensitive terrestrial or aquatic natural communities include Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986), List of Vegetation Alliances (CDFW, 2024), A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2024), California Streams, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), and National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL). CDFW considers any MCV2 alliance or association with a state rank of S1-S3 a sensitive natural community. Global and state rankings are defined below.

Global Ranking:
• G1-Critically Imperiled: At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors. • G2-Imperiled: At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors.
• G3-Vulnerable: At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors. • G4-Apparently Secure: Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
• G5-Secure: Common; widespread and abundant.

State Ranking:
• S1-Critically Imperiled: Critically imperiled in the state because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations) or because of factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state.
• S2-Imperiled: Imperiled in the state because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state.
• S3-Vulnerable: Vulnerable in the state due to a restricted range, relatively few populations

(often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation from the state.
• S4-Apparently Secure: Uncommon but not rare in the state; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
• S5-Secure: Common, widespread, and abundant in the state.

3.5.3 Wetlands
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) methods utilize three parameters (indicators) to determine wetland boundaries: (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) wetland hydrology, and (3) hydric soils. • Hydrology: The area is inundated either permanently or periodically at mean water depths:

6.6 ft, or the soil is saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season of the prevalent vegetation.
• Soils: Soils are present and have been classified as hydric, or they possess characteristics that are associated with reducing soil conditions.
• Plants: The prevalent vegetation consists of macrophytes that are typically adapted to areas having hydrologic and soil conditions described above. Hydrophytic species, due to morphological, physiological, and/or reproductive adaptation(s), can grow, effectively compete, reproduce, and/or persist in anaerobic soil conditions.

The USACE developed a classification system for plant species known to occur in wetlands. The plant species are categorized based on the frequency that they have been observed in wetlands. Species classified as obligate (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), and Facultative (FAC) are considered hydrophytic. If more than 50 percent of the plant species in each area are hydrophytic, the area meets the wetland vegetation criterion and is presumed to be a jurisdictional wetland under the CCA.

Plant Indicator Status Categories (as per USACE)
Indicator Category Indicator Symbol Definition
Obligate Wetland
Plants
OBL Plantsthat occur almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in wetlands under natural conditions, but which may also occur rarely (estimated probability <1 percent) in nonwetlands. Examples: Spartina alterniflora, Taxodium distichum.

Facultative
Wetland Plants
FACW Plants that occur usually (estimated probability >67 percent to 99 percent) in wetlands, but also occur (estimated probability 1 percent to 33 percent) in non-wetlands. Examples: Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Cornusstolonifera.

Facultative Plants FAC Plants with a similar likelihood (estimated probability 33 percent to 67 percent) of occurring in both wetlands and non-wetlands. Examples:

Gleditsia triacanthos, Smilax rotundifolia.

Facultative Upland
Plants
FACU Plants that occur sometimes (estimated probability 1 percent to <33 percent) in wetlands but occur more often (estimated probability >67 percent to 99 percent) in non-wetlands.

Examples: Quercus rubra, Potentilla arguta.

Obligate Upland
Plants
UPL Plants that occur rarely (estimated probability <1 percent) in wetlands but occur almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in non-wetlands under natural conditions. Examples:

Pinus echinata, Bromus mollis.

3.5.4 Streams, Rivers and Anadromous Fish Habitat
Watercourses and other waterbodies were classified using guidance from the California Forest Practice Rules 2024 (FPR). Streams and rivers were evaluated for their potential to support anadromous fish by reviewing the CNDDB’ intrinsic potential layers for fish species. Also, general observations of a stream’s bed substrate, bank stability, run-riffle-pool complexes, riparian quality, and upstream and downstream barriers were noted during a site visit.

Section 4.0: Study Area Setting

4.1 Climate and Hydrology
The project site is located near Ukiah, CA within Section 30, Township 15N, Range 12W, MDBM, in the Ukiah USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle, (Appendix D: Map 1, Vicinity, Map 2, Study Area-Imagery, & Map 3, Study Area-Topographic). The Study Area is located within the Williams Creek Watershed (HUC 12 180101045201). The average annual precipitation is 35-60 inches, the average annual air temperature is 54-59 degrees F, elevation is 1,560-1,680 feet, and the average frost-free period is 150 to 250 days.

4.2 Topography and Soils
The Study Area is located at approximately 1,560-1,680 feet in elevation and is underlain by eight (8) soil mapping units, according to the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Web Soil Survey (Appendix D: Map 6: USGS Soils): Cummiskey gravelly loam, 30 to 75 percent slopes, Hopland loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, high ffd, Hopland loam, 50 to 75 percent slopes, high ffd, Hopland-Maymen-Etsel complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes, Hopland-Wohly loams, 50 to 75 percent slopes, Maymen-Etsel-Snook complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes, high ffd, Urban land 0.2 0.0%, and Yorkville-Ashokawna-Witherell complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes. A description of the soil series is as follows:
116- Cummiskey gravelly loam, 30 to 75 percent slopes: This unit includes a very deep well drained solid that is typically vegetated with oaks, annual grasses and brush. The elevation is 500 to 2500 ft, avg precipitation is 35-50 in, and avg annual temperature is 54-59 degrees F. Permeability is low and water capacity is moderate.
141-Hopland loam, 30 to 50percent slopes, high ffd: This unit is moderately deep, well drained soils that is typically vegetated with oaks, annual grasses and forbs, and the occasional Douglas fir. The elevation is 500-3000 ft, average precipitation is 35-50 inches annually, avg annual temperature is 54-59 degrees F.

Permeability is slow and water capacity is low to moderate. Runoff is rapid and the risk of erosion is high. 142-Hopland loam, 50 to 75 percent slopes, high ffd: Moderately deep, well drained soils, on hills and mountains, vegetated with black oak, live oak, Oregon white oak, Douglas fir, and madrone. The elevation is 500-3000 ft, average annual precipitation is 35-50 in, and average annual temperature is 54- 59 degrees F. Permeability is moderately slow and the available water capacity is low to moderate.

Harvesting trees is not likely because of the steep slopes and unstable ground. 144 Hopland-Maymen-Etsel complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes: Located on the tops of mountains and ridges, vegetated with oaks and chaparral. The elevation is 2000-3500 ft, annual precipitation is 40 to 55 inches a year, and the average annual temperature is 53 to 58 degrees F. Most of the vegetation is oaks and chaparral. This type of soil usually occupies a small area imbedded in other soil types. The permeability of the soil is moderately slow and the water holding capacity is low to moderate. With this soil type, runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is high.

151-Hopland-Wohly loams, 50 to 75 percent slopes: Located on hills and mountains, which typically consist of oaks and pockets of Douglas fir for their vegetation. The elevation is 500 to 2500 ft, average precipitation 35 to 50 inches, average annual temperature is 54 to 59 degrees F. This soil type is well drained, permeability is moderately slow, and available water is low to moderate. The runoff for this soil happens fast and the hazard of erosion is very high.
160-Maymen-Etsel-Snook complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes, high ffd: This soil type is found on hills and mountains with the main type of vegetation consisting of chaparral plants. It is typically found at elevations of 1000 to 4000 ft. The average precipitation is 35 to 55 inches, and the average annual temperature is 53 to 58 degrees F. The permeability of this soil type is moderate and available water is low. Runoff is very fast, and the hazard of soil erosion is very high. 210-Urban land 0.2 0.0%: This soil type is found on terraces and alluvial plains in Ukiah. Slopes are nearly level or gently sloping with elevations of 500 to 1400 ft. More than 60 percent of this soil type is covered with impervious surfaces like concrete, asphalt, and buildings. Drainage, permeability, surface runoff, and available water capacity are variable because of all the impervious surfaces. 211-Witherell-Hopland-Ashokawna complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes, high ffd: This soil type exists on hills and mountains with native vegetation consisting of oaks and annual grasses. The elevation is 500 to 2500 ft, with annual precipitation of 35 to 55 inches, and average annual temperature 54 to 59 degrees F.

4.3 Biota and Land Use
Areas in which these soils reside are typically used for aggregate, wildlife habitat, recreation, watershed, and livestock grazing (USDA Web Soil Survey, 2024). Section 5 provides a detailed account of the biological communities found on-site, including sensitive and non-sensitive biological communities and additionally the special-status flora and fauna with potential to occur within the Study Area.

Section 5.0: Field Survey Results

5.1 Natural Communities
The Study Area and immediate surroundings were assessed during a site visit on April 17th, April 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024, to determine local biological communities present and develop a comprehensive list of all plant and wildlife species observed. Biological communities referred to in this report include Holland 1986 descriptions, USFS CALVEG classifications, and the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV2) alliance descriptions.

Holland Descriptions:

The Study Area is within the Valley and Foothill Grassland and Chamise Chaparral habitats as best classified by the habitat classification system described by Holland 1986. A description of this habitat type is as follows:

Valley and Foothill Grassland: This habitat includes introduced, annual Mediterranean grasses and native herbs. On most sites the native bunch grass species, such as needle grass, have been largely or entirely supplanted by introductions. Stands rich in natives are usually found on unusual substrates, such as serpentinite or somewhat alkaline soils.

Chamise Chaparral: This habitat is like the Upper Sonoran Mixed Chaparrals, but on shallower, drier soils or at somewhat lower elevations. Often on xeric slopes and ridges, with adjacent more mesic slopes and ridges, with adjacent mesic sites mantles by Upper Sonoran Mixed Chaparrals.

USFS CALVEG Classifications:

According to USDA Forest Service CALVEG mapping delineation, the regionally dominant vegetation type within the Study Area is a combination of Interior Live Oak Alliance and Lower Montane Mixed Chaparral Alliance (Appendix D: Map 4, CalVeg Classification). A description of this vegetation type is as follows:

INTERIOR LIVE OAK ALLIANCE: The Interior Live Oak (Quercus wislizenii) Alliance occurs mainly in southern areas of the Coast and Mountains Sections as mapped in eight subsections. It is often found to the north and east of the Coast Live Oak (Q. agrifolia) Alliance distribution and topographically above Blue Oak (Q. douglasii) dominated stands towards the east. This type often indicates xeric or rocky sites when associated with other hardwood types and has been mapped at elevations up to about 4400 feet (1342 m). The shrubby form (Q. wislizenii var. frutescens) may also dominate a site, especially in areas of frequent fires. Occasional trees and shrubs such as Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Gray Pine (Pinus sabiniana), Blue Oak (Q. douglasii), Oregon White Oak (Q. garryana) and Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) may be associated with this pure hardwood alliance. Interior Live Oak is known to hybidize with California Black Oak (Q. kelloggii) and Coast Live Oak (Q. agrifolia), occasionally making field identification more difficult.

LOWER MONTANE MIXED CHAPARRAL ALLIANCE: This widespread low-elevation mixed shrub type is usually found below about 5000 feet (1524 m) in this zone, having been mapped in thirty-three subsections. No single shrub species is dominant, as the mixture includes varying mixtures of Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), Wedgeleaf Ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneatus), Common and Whiteleaf Manzanita (Arctostaphylos manzanita, A. viscida), shrubby California Buckeye (Aesculus californica), Birchleaf Mountain Mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), Huckleberry Oak (Quercus vaccinifolia) and shrub oaks such as Scrub, Canyon Live, and Sadler Oaks (Quercus berberidifolia, Q. chrysolepis var. nana, Q. sadleriana). In western areas, it is sometimes found on poorer or ultramafic sites in proximity to Chamise and Knobcone Pine (Pinus attenuata) sites. At higher elevations it is often adjacent to the Upper Montane Mixed Chaparral type, with which it may share species such as Greenleaf Manzanita (A. patula), Brewer Oak (Quercus garryana var. breweri) and Deerbrush (C. integerrimus). Trees such as Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), various
MCV2 Alliances:

Biological communities observed were classified using the Manual of California Vegetation Online Edition (MCV2 Alliances, CNPS 2024) (Appendix D: Map 9: MCV2 Habitat Classification). In the Study Area, three (3) non-sensitive MCV2 Alliance were observed on site: (1) Quercus wislizeni-Quercus chrysolepis (shrub) Shrubland Alliance, (2) Avena ssp.-Bromus ssp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance, and (3) Pinus sabiniana Woodland Alliance.

5.1.1 Non-sensitive Natural Communities
Non-sensitive biological communities are those communities that are not afforded special protection under CEQA, and other Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. The Study Area is comprised of three (3) non-sensitive biological community, as classified under the MCV2 system:

Quercus wislizeni - Quercus chrysolepis (shrub) Shrubland Alliance: Canyon live oak - Interior live oak chaparral State Rarity: S3S4, Global Rarity: G4

• Characteristic Species: Quercus chrysolepis, Quercus parvula and/or Quercus wislizeni are dominant or co-dominate together in the shrub canopy with Adenostoma fasciculatum, Adenostoma sparsifolium, Arctostaphylos glandulosa, Arctostaphylos glauca, Carpenteria californica, Ceanothus cuneatus, Ceanothus integerrimus, Ceanothus leucodermis, Ceanothus oliganthus, Cercocarpus montanus, Frangula californica, Fraxinus dipetala, Hesperoyucca whipplei, Heteromeles arbutifolia, Prunus ilicifolia, Quercus agrifolia, Quercus berberidifolia, Rhamnus ilicifolia and/or Toxicodendron diversilobum. Emergent trees may be present at low cover, including Aesculus californica, Juniperus californica, Pinus attenuata, Pinus coulteri, Pinus sabiniana or Umbellularia californica.
• Habitats: Variable topography with steep slopes. Soils are alluvial or bedrock and may be rocky. • Vegetation Layers: Sparse cover of emergent trees may be present. Shrubs < 6 m; canopy is intermittent to continuous. The herbaceous layer is variable. • Membership Rules:
o Quercus wislizeni shrubs > 30% relative cover in the shrub canopy. o Quercus chrysolepis shrubs > 50% relative cover in the shrub canopy. o Regenerating or shrubby Quercus wislizeni (or Quercus parvula) is > 30% relative cover in the shrub layer or is codominant with Ceanothus oliganthus. o Regenerating or shrubby Quercus chrysolepis, Q. wislizeni, Q. parvula and/or Q. agrifolia > 30% relative cover in the shrub layer.

Arctostaphylos (canescens, manzanita, stanfordiana) Shrubland Alliance: Hoary, common, and Stanford manzanita chaparral State Rarity: S3S4, Global Rarity: G4 • Characteristic Species: Arctostaphylos canescens, Arctostaphylos manzanita or Arctostaphylos stanfordiana is dominant or co-dominant in the shrub canopy with Adenostoma fasciculatum, Arctostaphylos auriculata, Arctostaphylos glandulosa, Arctostaphylos viscida, Baccharis pilularis, Ceanothus spp., Eriodictyon californicum, Heteromeles arbutifolia, Lotus scoparius, Pickeringia montana or Quercus berberidifolia. Emergent trees may be present at low cover, including Pinus attenuata, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Quercus chrysolepis, Quercus douglasii or Quercus wislizeni.
• Habitats: Mid to upper slopes and ridges in transitional settings between grassland and oak woodland or closed-cone coniferous forest or associated with extensive old growth chaparral.

Soils are sandy to clayey loam, often derived from sandstone or volcanic. • Vegetation Layers: Shrubs 1-5 m; canopy is intermittent to continuous. Herbaceous layer is sparse to intermittent.
• Membership Rules:
o Arctostaphylos canescens, A. manzanita and/or A. stanfordiana dominant or co- dominant in the shrub canopy.
o Arctostaphylos canescens dominant or co-dominant in the shrub canopy. o Arctostaphylos canescens and/or A. manzanita > 30% relative in the shrub canopy.

Pinus sabiniana Woodland Alliance Foothill pine woodland, State Rarity: S4, Global Rarity: G4 • Characteristic Species: Pinus sabiniana is dominant or co-dominant in the tree canopy with Aesculus californica, Juniperus californica, Juniperus occidentalis, Pinus coulteri, Quercus chrysolepis and Quercus wislizeni.
• Habitats: Streamside terraces, valleys, slopes, and ridges. Soils are shallow, often stony, infertile, and moderately to excessively drained.

• Vegetation Layers: Trees < 20 m; canopy open to intermittent and one or two tiered. Shrubs are common or infrequent. The herbaceous layer is sparse or grassy. • Membership Rules:
o Pinus sabiniana > 10% absolute cover and dominant in the tree canopy. o Pinus sabiniana > 50% relative cover in the tree canopy.

5.1.2 Sensitive Natural Communities
Sensitive biological communities include those that are listed in CNDDB as well as observed MCV2 alliances or associations with state ranks of S1-S3 and are listed on CDFW’s List of California Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2024). There are no sensitive terrestrial communities present within the Study Area.

5.2 Aquatic Resources
Aquatic resources, communities, and habitats (e.g., watercourses, ponds, wetlands, vernal pools, etc.) are considered sensitive biological communities and are afforded special protections under CEQA and other Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. Wet areas are areas with observed hydrophytic vegetation and/or other hydrologic indicators that suggest the area is influenced by ponding or flooding for a significant amount of time throughout the growing season. Wet areas may provide habitat for special-status plants and wildlife as well as for nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).

Stream, Rivers, and Anadromous Fish Habitat:

Three (3) watercourses flow through the Study Area including Doolin Creek, a Class I watercourse, and two (2) unnamed Class III watercourses.

Wetlands:

Doolin Creek is a Class I watercourse that flows through the APN 157-06-003. The second and third watercourses flow through the furthest extent of the Study Area and are both Class III watercourses. All three (2) watercourses are classified by the NWI as a Riverine system (Appendix B: Map 7: National Wetland Inventory).
100-Year Flood Zone:

The entirety of the Study Area falls within a moderate hazard rating for 100-Year Flood Zone. This was concluded using the FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) (Appendix D: Map 8, National Flood Hazard Layer 100-Year Flood Zone). Recommendations to avoid or mitigate potential impacts to aquatic resources are discussed in Section 6.0, Assessment Summary and Recommendations.

5.3 Special-status Species

5.3.1 Special-status Plant Species
Upon review of the resource databases listed in Section 3.2, forty-two (42) special-status plant species have been documented within the vicinity of the Study Area. Please refer to Appendix A for a table of all special-status plant species which occur within a nine-quad search surrounding the Study Area and additional discussion of the potential for each species to occur within the Study Area. Special-status species documented within five miles of the Study Area are depicted in the CNDDB Vicinity map (Appendix D: Map 5, CNDDB Vicinity).

Of the forty-two (42) special-status plant species within the vicinity of the Study Area, twenty-three (23) special-status plant species have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Study Area. The remaining nineteen (19) special-status plant species documented within the vicinity of the Study Area are unlikely to occur or do not have the potential to occur due to one or more of the following reasons:
• Hydrologic conditions (e.g., vernal pools, riverine) necessary to support the special- status plant species are not present within the Study Area.
• Edaphic conditions (soils, e.g., rocky outcrops, serpentinite) necessary to support the specialstatus plant species are not present within the Study Area. • Topographic conditions (e.g., montane) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present within the Study Area.
• Unique pH conditions (e.g., alkali scalds, acidic bogs) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present within the Study Area.
• Associated vegetation communities (e.g., interior chaparral, tidal marsh) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present within the Study Area. • The Study Area is geographically isolated (e.g., outside of required elevations, coastal environment) from the documented range of the special-status plant species. • Ecological conditions (last recorded observations, human-made or natural disturbance) have encroached on species to a point causing presumed extinction.

The habitat requirements for the twenty-three (23) special-status plant species with moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area is described in the table below:

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Plants
Franciscan
onion
Allium
peninsulare var.
franciscanum
Rank 1B.2
G5T2
S2
Cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill
grassland, often in clay
soils, sometimes on
serpentine or volcanics.

A. peninsulare var.
franciscanum has a weak
serpentine affinity of 1.8.

The elevation ranges from
17 to 1050 feet (5 to 320
meters). A perennial herb
(bulb), the blooming period
is from May-Jun.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains valley
and foothill
grassland,
cismontane
woodlands, and
serpentine soils.

The Study Area
may provide
suitable habitat
for these species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Raiche’s
manzanita
Arctostaphylos
stanfordiana ssp.
raichei
Rank 1B.1
BLM: S
G3T2
S2
Chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest
(openings), rocky,
serpentine sites, often on
slopes and ridges. A.
stanfordiana ssp. raichei
has a strong serpentine
affinity of 2.6. The elevation
ranges from 1591 to 3511
feet (485 to 1070 meters). A
perennial evergreen
shrub, the blooming period
is from Feb-Apr.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains chaparral
and lower
montane
coniferousforest
habitat and
serpentine soil.

The Study Area
may provide
suitable habitat
for the species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Brewer'smilkvetch
Astragalus
breweri
Rank 4.2
G3
S3
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, meadows and
seeps, valley and foothill
grassland. Often in grassy
flats, meadows moist in
spring, and open slopes in
chaparral. Commonly on or
near volcanic or serpentine
sites. A. breweri has a
strong serpentine affinity of

3.2. The elevation ranges
from 296 to 2395 feet (90 to
730 meters). An annual
herb, the blooming period
is from Apr-Jun.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains chaparral
and grassland
habitats. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for the
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Rincon Ridge
ceanothus
Ceanothus
confusus
Rank 1B.1
BLM: S
G1 S1
Closed-cone coniferous
forest, chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
known from volcanic or
serpentine soils, dry
shrubby slopes. C. confusus
has a weak serpentine
affinity of 1.3. The
elevation ranges from 492
to 4200 feet (150 to 1280
meters). A shrub, the
blooming period is from
Feb-Jun.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide
suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
mountain lady’sslipper
Cypripedium
montanum
Rank 4.2
BLM: S
IUCN: VU
USFS: S G4
S4
Lower montane coniferous
forest, broadleaved upland
forest, cismontane
woodland, north coast
coniferous forest, often on
dry, undisturbed slopes.

The elevation rangesfrom
607 to 7300 feet (185 to
2225 meters). A perennial
herb (rhizomatous), the
blooming period is from
Mar-Aug.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide
suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
bare
monkeyflower
Erythranthe
nudata
Rank 4.3
G4
S4
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, moist areas,
often along drainages and
roadsides in serpentine
seeps. The elevation ranges
from 820 to 2297 feet (250
to 700 meters). An annual
herb, the blooming period is
from May-Jun.

Moderate
potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral,
cismontane
woodlands, and
roadside seeps
along roadsides.

The Study Area
may provide
suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
stinkbells
Fritillaria agrestis
Rank 4.2
G3
S3
Cismontane woodland,
chaparral, valley and
foothill grassland, pinyon
and juniper woodland,
sometimes on serpentine,
mostly found in non- native
grassland or in grassy
openings in clay soil. The
elevation ranges from 33to
5102 feet (10 to 1555
meters). A perennial
bulbiferous herb, the
blooming period is from
Mar-Jun.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral,
cismontane
woodlands, and
grassland
habitats. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Purdy's fritillary
Fritillaria purdyi
Rank 4.3
G4
S4
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, lower montane
coniferous forest, usually on
serpentine. F. fritillary has a
broad endemic serpentine
affinity of 4.5. The elevation
ranges from 574 to 7399
feet (175 to 2255 meters). A
perennial bulbiferous herb,
the blooming period is from
Mar-Jun.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide the
habitat
requirementsfor
the species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Toren’s grimmia
Grimmia torenii
Rank 1B.3
G2
S2
Cismontane woodland,
lower montane coniferous
forest, chaparral, often
found in openings, rocky,
boulder and rock walls,
carbonate, volcanic soils.

The elevation rangesfrom
1067 to 3806 feet (325 to
1160 meters). A moss, no
distinct blooming period.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains chaparral
and cismontane
woodlands
habitats. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. There are
no recommendations for
this species.

Mendocino
tarplant
Hemizonia
congesta ssp.
calyculata
Rank 4.3
G5T4 S4
Cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill
grassland, open woods and
forests, sometimes on
serpentine. H. congesta ssp.
calyculata has a weak
serpentine affinity of 1.5.

The elevation ranges from
738 to 4593 feet (225 to
1400 meters). An annual
herb, the blooming period is
from Jul-Nov.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide the
habitat
requirementsfor
the species.

Not Observed. Please
see Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
glandular
western flax
Hesperolinon
adenophyllum
Rank 1B.2
BLM: S
G2G3 S2S3
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and
foothill grassland,
serpentine soils, generally
found in serpentine
chaparral. H. adenophyllum
has a strict endemic
serpentine affinity of 5.7.

The elevation ranges from
1395 to 4413 feet (425 to
1345 meters). An annual
herb, the blooming period
is from May-Aug.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide the
habitat
requirementsfor
the species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
small groundcone
Kopsiopsis
hookeri
Rank 2B.3
G4?
S1S2
North coast coniferous
forest, open woods, shrubby
places, generally on
Gaultheria shallon.

The elevation ranges from
394 to 4708 feet (120 to
1435 meters). A perennial
herb, the blooming period is
from Apr-Aug.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Colusa layia
Layia
septentrionals
Rank 1B.2
BLM: S
G2 S2
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and
foothill grassland, scattered
coloniesin fields and grassy
slopes in sandy or serpentine
soil. The elevation ranges
from 49 to 3609 feet (15 to
1100 meters). An annual
herb, the blooming period is
from Apr-May.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide
the habitat
requirementsfor
the species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
bristly leptosiphon
Leptosiphon
acicularis
Rank 4.2
G4?
S4?
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal prairie,
valley and foothill
grassland. The elevation
ranges from 180 to 4920
feet (55 to 1500 meters). An
annual herb, the blooming
period isfrom Apr-Jul.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral,
cismontane
woodland, and
valley and
foothill
grassland
habitats. The
Study Area
may provide
suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
woolly-headed
lessingia
Lessingia
hololeuca
Rank 3
G2G3 S2S3
Coastal scrub, lower
montane coniferousforest,
valley and foothill
grassland, broadleaved
upland forests, often on
clay or serpentine along
fields and roadsides. L.
hololeuca has a strong
serpentine affinity of 2.5.

The elevation ranges from
49 to 1001 feet (15 to 305
meters). An annual herb,
the blooming period is
from Jun-Oct.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains valley
and foothill
grassland
habitat. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
redwood lily
Lilium rubescens
Rank 4.2
G3
S3
Chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest,
broadleaved upland forest,
upper montane coniferous
forest, north coast
coniferous forest,
sometimes serpentine.

L. rubescens has a weak
serpentine affinity of 2. The
elevation ranges from 99 to
6267 feet (30 to 1910
meters). A perennial herb
(bulb), the blooming
period isfrom Apr-Aug.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral
habitat. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Mendocino
bush-mallow
Malacothamnus
mendocinensis
Rank 1A
GXQ
SX
Chaparral, open roadside
banks. The elevation
ranges from 1395 to 1887
feet (425 to 575 meters). A
shrub, the blooming period
is from May-Jun.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral
habitat. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
green
monardella
Monardella
viridis
Rank 4.3
G3
S3
Broadleaved upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane
woodland. The elevation
ranges from 328 to 3314
feet (100 to 1010 meters).

A perennial herb, the
blooming period is from
Jun-Sep.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide the
habitat
requirementsfor
the species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

Bolander's
catchfly
Silene
bolanderi
Rank 1B.2
G2
S2
Cismontane woodland,
lower montane coniferous
forest, North Coast
coniferous forest, meadows
and seeps, chaparral
(edges). Usually grassy
openings, sometimes dry
rocky slopes, canyons, or
roadsides; sometimes
serpentinite. The elevation
ranges from 1380 to 3775
feet (420 to 1150 meters).

A perennial herb, the
blooming period is from
May-Jun.

Moderate
Potential.

The Study Area
contains lower
montane
coniferous forest
that may provide
suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendations for
species.

Hoffman’s
bristly
jewelflower
Streptanthus
glandulosusssp.
hoffmanii
Rank 1B.3
G4T2
S2
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and
foothill grassland, moist,
steep rocky banks in
serpentine and nonserpentine soils.

The elevation ranges from
197 to 2510 feet (60 to 765
meters). An annual herb,
the blooming period is
from Mar-Jul.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral,
cismontane
woodland, valley
and foothill
grassland. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.
beaked tracyina
Tracyina
rostrata
Rank 1B.2
USFS: S
G2
S2
Cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill
grassland, chaparral, often
observed in open grassy
meadows commonly within
oak woodland and
grassland habitats. The
elevation ranges from 492
to 2609 feet (150 to 795
meters). An annual herb,
the blooming period is
from May-Jun.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
chaparral,
cismontane
woodland and
grassland
habitats that may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendations for
species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT

REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL

TO OCCUR IN

THE STUDY
AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Santa Cruz clover
Trifolium
buckwestiorum
Rank 1B.1
BLM: S
G2
S2
Coastal prairie,
broadleaved upland forest,
cismontane woodland,
often found in moist
grasslands along gravelly
margins. The elevation
ranges from 99 to 2641 feet
(30 to 805 meters). An
annual herb, the blooming
period is from Apr-Oct.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area
contains
cismontane
woodland and
broadleaved
upland forest
habitats that may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendations for
species.
oval-leaved
viburnum
Viburnum
ellipticum
Rank 2B.3
G4G5
S3?
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, lower montane
coniferous forest.

The elevation ranges from
706 to 4593 feet (215 to
1400 meters). A shrub, the
blooming period is from
May-Jun.

High Potential.

The Study Area
does provide the
species’ habitat
requirements.

Not Observed. Please see
Section 6 for
recommendations.

No (0) special status plant species were observed within the Study Area during the biological site assessment. Please see Section 6 for plant species recommendations.

Please refer to Appendix A for a table of all special-status plant species within a nine-quad vicinity of the Study Area as well as a discussion of the potential for each species to occur within the Study Area based on habitat present. No special-status species were observed within the Study Area during the Rare and Special-Status Plant Surveys conducted on April 17th, 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024. Please refer to Appendix B for a complete list of all floristic species observed within the Study Area during the BA site visit.

5.3.2 Special-status Animal Species
A total of fifty-four (54) special-status wildlife species have been documented within the vicinity of the Study Area. Please refer to Appendix A for a table of all special-status wildlife species which occur within the vicinity of the Study Area and discussion of the potential for each species to occur within the Study Area. Special-status species documented within five miles of the Study Area are depicted in the CNDDB Vicinity map (Appendix D: Map 5, CNDDB Vicinity).

Of the fifty-four (54) special-status wildlife species within the vicinity of the Study Area, twenty (20) special-status wildlife species recorded have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Study Area.

The remaining thirty-two (34) special-status wildlife species documented within the vicinity of the Study Area are unlikely to occur or do not have the potential to occur due to one or more of the following reasons:
• Aquatic Habitats (e.g., streams, rivers, vernal pools) necessary to support special- status wildlife species are not present within the Study Area. • Vegetation Habitats (e.g., forested area, riparian, grassland) that provide nesting and/or

foraging resources necessary to support special-status wildlife species are not present within the Study Area.
• Physical Structures and Vegetation (e.g., caves, old-growth trees) that provide nesting, cover, and/or foraging habitat necessary to support special-status wildlife species are not present within the Study Area.
• Host Plants (e.g., Cirsium sp.) that provide larval and nectar resources necessary to support special-status wildlife species are not present within the Study Area. • Historic and Contemporary Disturbance (e.g., cattle grazing, agriculture) deter the presence of the special-status wildlife species from occupying the Study Area. • The Study Area is outside the documented nesting range of special-status wildlife species.

The twenty-two (22) special-status wildlife species with moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area are described in the table below.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Amphibians
red-bellied
newt
Taricha
rivularis
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
G2
S2
T. rivularis occur in coastal
drainages from Humboldt County
south to Sonoma County, inland to
Lake County within broadleaved
upland forest, North Coast
coniferous forest, redwood, and
riparian forest and woodland
habitats. There is an isolated
population of uncertain origin in
Santa Clara County. Adults are
active at the surface in moist
environments. Transformed
juveniles leave aquatic
environments and go into hiding in
underground shelters, often until
they are ready to reproduce. This
species will migrate over 1km to
breed, typically in streams with
moderate flow and clean, rocky
substrate.

High Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within High (1)
suitability for this
species and does
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Avifauna
American
goshawk
Accipiter
atricapillus
CDFW:

SSC IUCN:

LC
G5
S3
Throughout their range, whether at
sea level or in alpine settings,
American Goshawks nest in mature
and old-growth forests with more
than 60% closed canopy. They
typically build nests in conifers,
such as Douglas-fir, white fir,
California red fir, ponderosa pine,
western larch, and western
hemlock, along with deciduous
trees including aspens and paper
birch ear breaks in the canopy,
such as a forest trail, jeep road, or
opening created by a downed tree,
and prefer sites with a creek, pond,
or lake nearby.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.11), Medium (0.44),
and High (1)
suitability for this
species and may
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.

Cooper’s hawk
Accipiter
cooperies
CDFW: WL
IUCN: LC
G5
S4
A. cooperii are forest and
woodland birds, often in open,
interrupted or marginal woodlands
within cismontane woodland,
riparian forest/woodland and upper
montane coniferous forested
habitats. Nest sites mainly in
riparian growths of deciduous trees
as in canyon bottoms on river flood
plains and in live oak trees.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.33), Medium (0.66),
and High (1)
suitability for this
species and may
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.
grasshopper
sparrow
Ammodramus
savannarum
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
A. savannarum are an uncommon
and local, summer resident in
valley and foothill grassland west
of the Cascade- Sierra Nevada crest
from Mendocino and Trinity
Counties south to San Diego
County. A. savannarum nests on
the ground in dense grasslands on
rolling hills, lowland plains, in
valleys and on hillsides on lower
mountain slopes in areas with a
variety of native grasses and tall
forbs and scattered shrubs for
singing perches. Nests are typically
found at the base of a small clump
of overhanging grass or other
vegetation, perhaps in close
proximity to other breeding
grasshopper sparrows, and this
species may double or triple clutch.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.33) and Medium
(0.66) suitability for
this species. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for the
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
golden eagle
Aquila
chrysaetos
BLM: S
CDF: S
CDFW: FP,
WL
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
Golden eagles are found primarily
in rolling foothills, mountain areas,
sage-juniper flats, and desert in
broadleaved upland forest,
cismontane woodland, coastal
prairie, Great Basin grassland,
Great Basin scrub, lower montane
coniferous forest, pinon and juniper
woodlands, upper montane
coniferous forest and valley
foothill grassland habitats up to
12,000 feet. Cliff-walled canyons
provide nesting habitat in most
parts of the range; also, large trees
in open areas.

High Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within High
(0.77) suitability for
this species and does
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.
white-tailed
kite
Elanus
leucurus
BLM: S
CDFW: FP
IUCN: LC
G5
S3S4
E. leucurus forages in open
grasslands, meadows, or marshes
close to isolated, dense-topped
trees for nesting and perching. This
species is located in rolling
foothills and valley margins with
scattered oaks and river
bottomlands or marshes next to
deciduous woodland within
cismontane woodland, marsh and
swamp, riparian woodland, valley
and grassland, and wetland
habitats.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.33) and Medium
(0.66) suitability for
this species. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendations for
avifauna species.
osprey
Pandion
haliaetus
CDF: S
CDFW: WL
IUCN: LC
G5
S4
P. haliaetus occupies riparian
forest habitat. They forage over
ocean shores, bays, freshwater
lakes and larger streams. They
construct large nests in large trees,
snags, and blown-out treetops
within 15 miles of a good fishproducing body of water.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.33) and Medium
(0.66) suitability for
this species. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
yellow warbler
Setophaga
petechia
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
G5
S3S4
S. petechia often inhabits riparian
forest, scrub and woodland habitats
in summer in close proximity to
water. Frequently found nesting
and foraging in willows shrubs and
thickets and in alders, ash,
cottonwoods, and sycamores. This
species will also nest in montane
shrubbery in open conifer forest in
the Cascades and Sierra Nevada.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.33) and Medium
(0.66) suitability for
this species. The
Study Area may
provide suitable
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed: See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
avifauna species.

Insects
obscure
bumble bee
Bombus
caliginosus
IUCN: VU
G2G3
S1S2
Bombus caliginosus inhabits open
grassy coastal prairies and Coast
Range meadows in coastal areas
from Santa Barbara County to
north to Washington state. Nesting
occurs underground as well as
above ground in abandoned bird
nests. Males patrol circuits in
search of mates. This species is
classified as a medium longtongued species, whose food plants include Ceanothus, Cirsium,
Clarkia, Keckiella, Lathyrus,
Lotus, Lupinus, Baccharis,
Rhododendron, Rubus, Trifolium,
and Vaccinium.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area may
contain suitable
habitat requirements
for this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
insect species.
western
bumble bee
Bombus
occidentali
s
SCE
IUCN: VU
USFS: S
G3
S1
The habitat for this species is
described as open grassy areas,
urban parks and gardens, chaparral
and shrub areas, and mountain
meadows. typically nests
underground in abandoned rodent
burrows or other cavities Food
plants of Bombus occidentalis
include Ceanothus, Centaurea,
Chrysothamnus, Cirsium,
Geranium, Grindellia, Lupinus,
Melilotus, Monardella, Rubus,
Solidago, and Trifolium.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area may
contain suitable
habitat requirements
for this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
insect species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
monarch –
California
overwintering
pop.

Danaus
plexippus pop.
1 FC
IUCN: EN
USFS: S
G4T1T2 S2
D. plexippus are a migratory
species, making massive
migrations from August-October
to hibernate along the California
coast and central Mexico. They
commonly occur in closed-cone
coniferous forest habitat. This
species roosts located in windprotected tree groves(eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with
nectar and water sources nearby.

D. plexippus feeds on flower
nectar from all milkweeds,
dogbane, lilac, red clover, lantana,
thistles, goldenrods, blazing stars,
ironweed and tickseed sunflower.

The majority of overwintering
sites are found within 1.5 miles of
the Pacific Ocean or San
Francisco Bay which moderates
temperatures. Sites are typically
found at low elevations (200-
300ft) and situated on slopes
oriented to the south, southwest,
or west which provide the most
solar radiation, or in shallow
canyons or gullies.

Monarchs require very specific
microclimatic conditions at
overwintering sites including
dappled sunlight, high humidity,
fresh water, and an absence of
freezing temperatures or high
winds. Fall or winter-blooming
flowers provide nectar which may
be needed to maintain lipid levels
necessary for spring migration.

Moderate
Potential. The
Study Area may
contain suitable
habitat requirements
for this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
insect species.

Mammals
pallid bat
Antrozous
pallidus
BLM: S
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
USFS: S
G4
S3
A. pallidus is found in chaparral,
coastal scrub, desert wash, Great
Basin grassland, Great Basin scrub,
Mojavean desert scrub, riparian
woodland, Sonoran desert scrub,
upper montane coniferous forest,
valley & foothill grassland habitats.

Most common in open, dry habitats
with rocky areas for roosting. This
species forages along river
channels. Roosts must protect bats
from high temperatures. This
species is very sensitive to
disturbance of roosting sites.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within Low
(0.11) and Moderate
(0.66) suitability, for
this species and may
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
northern
California
ringtail
Bassariscus
astutusraptor
CDFW: FP
G5TNR
SNR
This species will exploit a variety
of habitats such as dry, rocky,
brush-covered hillsides or riparian
areas, typically near an open water
source. Dens are most often located
in rock crevices, boulder piles, or
talus, but also tree hollows, root
cavities, and rural buildings. They
rarely use the same den for more
than a few days. Females with
litters change dens within 10 days
of birth and almost daily after 20
days.

Moderate
Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within
Moderate (0.67)
suitability for this
species and may
provide the required
habitat for this
species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.

North
American
porcupine
Erethizon
dorsatum
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
E. dorsatum inhabit broadleaved
upland forest, cismontane
woodland, closed-cone coniferous
forest, lower montane coniferous
forest, North coast coniferous
forest, and upper montane
coniferous forest habitats. This
herbivore eats leaves, twigs, and
green plants like Skunk cabbage
(Symplocarpus foetidus) and
clovers (Trifolium sp.). This
species makes its dens in hollow
trees, decaying logs and caves in
rocky areas. Recognized as
primarily solitary and nocturnal,
E. dorsatum may be seen foraging
during daytime.

Moderate Potential.

According to the
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within
Moderate (0.67)
suitability for this
species. The study
area provides a
significant amount
of the species’
habitat requirements.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.
western
mastiff bat
Eumops
perotis
californicus
BLM: S
CDFW:

SSC
G4G5T4
S3S4
E. perotis californicus occurs in a
wide variety of habitats, including
chaparral, coastal and desert scrub,
coniferous and deciduous forest
and woodland. Roosting sites
occur in rocky outcrops, crevices
and cliffs with 50-100% rocky
slopes. Day roosts are established
in crevices in rocky canyons and
cliffs, trees, tunnels and buildings
with a minimum 2-meter (6.5 foot)
drop-off to provide a takeoff or
launching area. The animals are
strong, fast fliers, with a likely
extensive foraging range, up to 15
miles from the nearest possible
roosting site. Foraging occurs in
broad, open areas, woodlands and
forest, scrub, chaparral, grassland,
riparian and agricultural areas and
there is no evidence of this species
being habitat specialists.

High Potential.

The CWHR
Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the
Study Area falls
within High (1)
suitability for this
species throughout
the study area.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
hoary bat
Lasiurus
cinereus
IUCN: LC
G3G4
S4
L. cinereus prefers open habitats
or habitat mosaics, with access to
trees for cover and open areas or
habitat edges for feeding in
broadleaved upland forest,
cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest, and
North coast coniferous forest
habitats. Hoary bats roost in dense
foliage of medium to large trees.

They feed primarily on moths and
requires water.

Moderate
Potential. The
CWHR Predicted
Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area
falls within
Moderate (0.4)
suitability for this
species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.
western red
bat
Lasiurus
frantzii
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
G4
S3
L. blossevillii roosts primarily in
trees, often 2-40ft above the ground
from sea level through mixed
conifer forests. Typical habitats
include cismontane woodland,
lower montane coniferous forest,
riparian forests and woodlands.

This species prefers habitat edges
and mosaics with treesthat are
protected from above and open
below with open areas for foraging.

Moderate
Potential. The
CWHR
Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the
Study Area falls
within Moderate
(0.55) suitability for
this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.
long-eared
myotis
Myotis evotis
BLM:S
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
M. evotis is found in all brush,
woodland and forested habitats
from sea level to approximately
9,000 feet in elevation; however,
prefers coniferous woodlands and
forests. Foraging occurs along
habitat edges, in open spaces and
over water. Nursery colonies are
often found within buildings,
crevices, spaces under bark and
snags. Caves are used primarily as
night roosts.

Moderate
Potential. The
CWHR
Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the
Study Area falls
within Moderate
suitability with
pockets of High for
this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.
fisher
[West
Coast
DPS]
Pekania
pennanti
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
BLM: S
G5
S3
P. pennanti inhabit forest stands
with late-successional
characteristics including
intermediate-to-large tree stages of
coniferous forest and deciduousriparian areas with high percent canopy closure in North coast
coniferous forest, old growth and
riparian forest habitat. P. pennanti
use cavities, snags, logs and rocky
areas for cover and denning and
require large areas of mature, dense
forest. Fishers are primarily
solitary, except during breeding
season (February – April).

Moderate
Potential. The
CWHR
Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the
Study Area falls
within Moderate and
High suitability for
this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

POTENTIAL TO

OCCUR IN THE

STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
American
badger
Taxidea taxus
CDFW:

SSC
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
T. taxus are found throughout
most of California in a variety of
habitats and are most abundant in
drier open stages of most shrub,
forest and herbaceous habitats,
with friable soils. T. taxus dig
burrows in the friable soils and
frequently reuse old burrows and
prey on burrowing
rodents.

Moderate
Potential. The
CWHR
Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the
Study Area falls
within Moderate and
High suitability for
this species.

Not Observed. See
Section 6 for general
recommendationsfor
mammal species.

No (0) special status wildlife species were observed within the Study Area during the biological site assessment. Please see Section 6 for animal species recommendations.

Section 6.0: Assessment Summary and Recommendations

6.1 Biological Communities
The Study Area and immediate surroundings were assessed during a site visit April 17th, April 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024, to determine local biological communities present. Biological communities observed were classified using data collected in the field and the Manual of California Vegetation Online Edition (MCV2 Alliances, CNPS 2024). The Study Area contains three (3) nonsensitive biological communities, three (3) sensitive aquatic communities and no (0) sensitive biological communities.

Non-Sensitive Communities:

Three (3) non-sensitive biological community In the Study Area, three (3) non-sensitive MCV2 Alliance were observed on site: (1) Quercus wislizeni-Quercus chrysolepis (shrub) Shrubland Alliance, (2) Avena ssp.-Bromus ssp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance, and (3) Pinus sabiniana Woodland Alliance. No (0) sensitive biological communities were identified. A detailed description of these biological communities is discussed in section 5.1.1.

Sensitive Aquatic Communities:

Aquatic resources, communities, and habitats (e.g., watercourses, ponds, wetlands, vernal pools, etc.) are considered sensitive biological communities and are afforded special protections under CEQA and other Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. Aquatic habitats present within the Study Area could provide suitable aquatic or riparian habitats for sensitive flora and fauna.

Three (3) watercourses flow through the Study Area including Doolin Creek a Class I and two unnamed Class III watercourses. All three (3) watercourses are classified as a Riverine system by the USFWS National Wetland Inventory (Appendix D: Map 7, National Wetland Inventory).

Recommendations for wetland habitats are listed below:
• It is recommended that all earthwork within 50-ft of any wetland adhere to standard methods of erosion and sediment control.
• It is recommended that any future removal or disturbance to wetland vegetation be avoided if

possible or mitigated at a ratio of 3:1 total vegetative cover.

The Study Area does fall within the 100-year flood zone according to the FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) (Appendix D: Map 8, NFHL 100-Year Flood Zone). All the study areas were determined to have moderate risk within the 100-year flood zone.

Recommendations for sensitive aquatic communities are listed below:
• It is recommended that all earthwork adjacent to any watercourse or wetlands adhere to standard methods of erosion and sediment control and, if possible, complete all work while the channel is dry to reduce sediment load downstream.
• It is recommended that any work within a watercourse or wetlands with the potential to impact aquatic resources be conducted in compliance with CDFW’s Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement.
• It is recommended that future expansions or development associated with this project be located outside of the NFHL 100-year flood zone as well as SWRCB setbacks.

6.2 Special-status Species
Twenty-three (23) special-status plant species and twenty (20) special-status wildlife species have a moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area based on habitat present. Please refer to the tables in section 5.2, Special-Status Species, for a complete list, state rarity ranks, and habitat descriptions of species with moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area. No (0) special status plant or wildlife species were observed within the Study Area during the biological site assessment and botanical surveys.

6.2.1 Special-status Plant Species
Special-status plant species are afforded special protections under CEQA Section 15380 and the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA). Twenty-three (23) special-status plant species have a moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area. These species are listed in Section 5.2.1 above.

The Biological Assessment and Rare Plant Survey constitutes a seasonally appropriate botanical survey for this project that was conducted on April 17th, April 18th, May 22nd, May 23rd and July 18th, 2024. No (0) special-status species were observed during the BA and Rare Plant Survey. The Rare Plant Surveys were conducted during the blooming period for all plants with moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area. A complete list of all plant species observed is included in Appendix B: List of Observed Taxa.

6.2.2 Special-status Wildlife Species
Special-status wildlife species are afforded special protections under the ESA, CESA, CEQA, CFGC, and other local laws and regulations. Native nesting and migratory birds are protected under the MBTA and CFGC Section 3503, 3503.5, and 3513.

Twenty (20) special-status wildlife species have a moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area. These species are listed in Section 5.2.2 above. No (0) special-status wildlife species were observed within the Study Area during the biological site visits. A complete list of all wildlife species observed is included in Appendix B: List of Observed Taxa.

Amphibians:

One (1) special status amphibian species has a moderate potential to occur within the Study Area.

Recommendations for special-status amphibian species:
• It is recommended that all earthwork within or adjacent to any watercourse or waterbody adhere to standard methods of erosion and sediment control. • It is recommended that a qualified biologist be on site for any groundbreaking activities or dewatering event within or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody to address the potential for the presence of special-status amphibian species.
• It is recommended that any modifications to watercourses and waterbodies be notified for and adhere to a CDFW Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. • It is recommended that any future expansions or development associated with the project be located outside of the SWRCB setbacks.

No (0) special-status amphibian species were observed within the Study Area during the biological site assessment.

Avifauna
Seven (7) special status avian species have moderate to high potential to occur within the Study Area.

Development within the Study Area may have the potential to significantly impact bird species if present.

Most non-game bird species in California are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) which prohibits the deliberate destruction of active nests belonging to protected species. Groundbreaking activities, specifically vegetation removal, within the Study Area during avian breeding periods could significantly impact nesting bird species.

Recommendations for special-status avian species and migratory bird species are listed below:
• It is recommended that nesting bird surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to the commencement of any activity that results in the removal of vegetation during nesting bird season. Nesting bird season is between March 1st and August 31st of any year. • It is recommended that any active bird nest not be removed, relocated, or otherwise disturbed for any purpose until all fledglings have left the nest.

No (0) special-status avian species or nests were observed within the Study Area during the biological assessment.

Insects:

Three (3) special status insect species have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Study Area.

Recommendations for special-status insect species are listed below:
• It is recommended that trees or other vegetation occupied by overwintering populations of monarch not be removed or otherwise disturbed until all monarchs have left the site. • It is recommended that monarch surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of tree/shrub removal from November 1st-January 31st of any year when monarchs are most likely to be found overwintering. • Land managers could consider planting or cover cropping with beneficial forage or host species for special-status insects. Host species for the monarch butterfly include milkweed (Asclepias sp.). Forage species for the western bumblebee include Ceanothus, Centaurea, Chrysothamnus, Cirsium, Geranium, Grindellia, Lupinus, Melilotus, Monardella, Rubus, Solidago, and Trifolium.

• If a special-status insect nests are observed, it is recommended that active nests not be removed, relocated, or otherwise disturbed until the nest becomes inactive.

No (0) special-status insects or insect nests were observed within the Study Area during the biological site assessment.

Mammals
Nine (9) special status mammal species have a moderate to high potential to occur within the Study Area.

Recommendations for special-status insect species are listed below:
• If evidence of bat roosts are observed (i.e. bat guano, ammonia odor, grease stained cavities) around trees, cavities, or structures proposed for removal, it is recommended that preconstruction bat surveys be conducted no more than 14 days prior to groundbreaking activities.

If bat roosts are identified, buffer or mitigation measures should be established by a qualified biologist.
• If evidence of special-status mammal borrows or denning activity is observed, it is recommended that pre-construction surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist for activities that may affect den sites.

No (0) special-status mammals or evidence were observed during the biological site assessment.

6.3 Wildlife Corridors
No change to foraging or wintering habitat for migratory birds has occurred as a result of the cannabis development. Additionally, no significant impacts to migratory corridors for amphibian, aquatic, avian, mammalian, or reptilian species is expected because of the cannabis development.

6.4 Critical Habitat
The Study Area does not contain and is not adjacent to critical habitat for any Federal or State- listed species (Appendix E: Supporting Documents; USFWS IPAC Official Species List).

Section 7.0: References
Baicich, P. J., Harrison, J. O. 2005. Nests, Eggs, and Nestlings of North American Birds (2nd Edition).

Princeton University Press.

Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken (eds.). 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, 2nd Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Barbour, M., T. Keeler-Wolf, and A. A. Schoenherr (eds.). 2007. Terrestrial Vegetation of California (3rd Edition). University of California Press.

Barbour, M. G. and J. Major. Terrestrial Vegetation of California. 1998. The California Native Plant Society.

Behler, J. L. and F. W. King. 1979. National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. New York, NY.

Best, T. L., Kiser, W. M., Freeman, P. W. 1996. Eumops perotis. American Society of Mammalogists.

Mammalian Species 534:1-8.

Bjornn, T. C., Reiser, D. 1991. Habitat Requirements of Salmonids in Streams. American Fisheries Society Special Publication. 19.

Bourque, R. 2018. Lecture: Spatial Ecology: Movement. Presented at Foothill Yellow-legged Frog:

Ecology, Management, and Regulation Workshop. Presented by The Wildlife Society.

Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Quick Viewer (online edition, v6.24.0501). Sacramento, CA. Accessed on May 2, 2024, from:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data#43018410- cnddb-quickview-tool California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) BIOS Commercial/Spotted Owl Viewer (online edition, v6.24.0501).

Sacramento, CA. Accessed on May 2, 2024, from: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/SpottedOwl-Info California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. California Sensitive Natural Communities.

Sacramento, CA. Accessed on May 2, 2024, from
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations.

Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, CA. Accessed on May 2, 2024.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. Accessed on April 30, 2024, from: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. September 2003. List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the California Natural Diversity Database.

Biogeographic Data Branch, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000. Guidelines for Assessing the Effects of Proposed Developments on Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plants and Plant Communities. The Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2024. California Forest Practice Rules 2024. Resource Management, Forest Practice Program, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, CA.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v9.5). California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Accessed on May 3, 2024, from: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Accessed on May 3, 2024, from: www.cnps.org/vegetation.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2001. Botanical Survey Guidelines. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 1998. Policy on Mitigation Guidelines Regarding Impacts to Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plants. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.

Call, M. W. 1978. Nesting Habits and Survey Techniques for Common Western Raptors. U.S.

Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Portland, OR. Technical Note. No. 316. 115pp.

CalFlora Database at www.calflora.org/ Accessed for descriptions, and habitat ranges and site suitability of rare, threatened or endangered plants found on CNPS and CNDDB queries.

Accessed on May 3, 2024.

CalPhoto Database at http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/photos/flora/, for photos, descriptions, and habitat ranges of rare, threatened or endangered plants found on CNPS and CNDDB queries. Accessed on May 2, 2024.

Cogswell, H. L. 1977. Water birds of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. 399pp.

Consortium of California Herbaria (CCH). 2012. Data provided by the participants of the Consortium of California Herbaria. Available at: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/consortium. Accessed on May 13, 2024.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer. Accessed on May 13, 2024 from: https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/national-flood- hazard-layer Fellers, G. M., Pierson, E. D. 2002. Habitat Use and Foraging Behavior of Townsend’s Big- Eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in Coastal California. Journal of Mammalogy. 83, Issue 1: 167-177.

Available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jmammal/article/83/1/167/2372774#38014831 Fiedler, P. L. 1996. Common Wetland Plants of Central California. Army Core of Engineers. Goulsen, D. 2003. Bumblebees: their behavior and ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.

Grinnell, J., J. S. Dixon, J. M. Linsdale. 1937. Fur-bearing mammals of California. 2 Vols.

University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 777 pp.

Heinrich, B. 2004. Bumblebee economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 245 pp.

Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.

Nongame- Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 156 pp.

Jepson Flora Project (JFP) (eds.). Jepson eFlora. Accessed on May 10, 2024 from:
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/
Kupferberg, S. 2018. Lecture: Natural and Unnatural History. Presented at Foothill Yellow- legged Frog: Ecology, Management, and Regulation Workshop. Presented by The Wildlife Society.

Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA.

Little, E. L. 2000. National Audubon Society Field Guide: Trees of the Western Region. New York.

Alfred A. Knopf.

Mayer, K. E. and W. F. Laudenslayer. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. State of California, Sacramento, CA.

Miller, D. J. and R. N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the Coastal Marine Fishes of California, Fish Bulletin No. 157. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.

Moyle, P. B., J. E. Williams, and E. D. Wirkamanayake. 1989. Fish species of special concern of California. Final report submitted to California Dept. of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova. 222 pp.

Moyle, P. B. 1976. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1996. Proposed endangered status for five ESUs of Steelhead and proposed threatened status for five ESUs of steelhead in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California. Federal Register 61(155):41541-61.

Pierson, E. D., Rainey, W. E. 1998. Western mastiff bat, Eumops perotis. Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California, Bolster, B. C., Ed., 1998.

Peterson, R. T. 1990. A Field Guide to Western Birds. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA.

Remsen, J. V. 1978. Bird species of special concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Wildlife Management Administrative Report. No. 78(1) 54 pp.

Sawyer, J. O. and T. Keeler-Wolfe. 2024. A Manual of California Vegetation. Online Edition.

California Native Plant Society. Accessed on May 3, 2024.

Sawyer, J. O. and T. Keeler-Wolfe and J.M. Evans. 2009, Second Addition. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.

Sawyer, J. O. and T. Keeler-Wolfe. 2008. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.

Sawyer, J. O. and T. Keeler-Wolfe. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. 471 pp.

Sibley, D. A. 2000. The Sibley Guide to Birds. National Audubon Society. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY.

Squires, J. R., Reynolds, R. T. 1997. Northern Goshawk (Acipiter gentilis), version 2.0. The Birds of North America (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. Accessed on May 3, 2024 from: https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.298 State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2019. Cannabis Cultivation Policy Principles and Guidelines for Cannabis Cultivation. State Water Resources Control Board.

Sacramento, CA.

Stebbins, Robert C, and McGinnis, Samuel M. Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California:

Revised Edition. (California Natural History Guides). University of California Press. 2012.

Thomson, C. R, Wright, A. N., and Shaffer, H. B. 2016. California Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern. University of California Press. Oakland, CA. 390 pp.

Thorne, Robert F. 1976. The vascular plant communities of California. In: Latting, June, ed.

Symposium proceedings: Plant communities of southern California; 1974 May 4; Fullerton, CA.

Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California Native Plant Society: 1-31. [3289] Udvardy, M. D. F. 1994. National Audubon Society Field Guide to North America Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. New York, NY. 822pp.

USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual. 1987. Unites States Army Corps of Engineers.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. 2024. Soil compositions for specific locations in the United States. Accessed on May 2, 2024 from:
https://websoilsurvey.se.egov.usda.gov
US Climate Data. 2024. Version 3.0. https://www.usclimatedata.com/ Accessed May 7, 2024.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2004. Twelve month finding for a Petition to List the West Coast Distinct Population Segment of the Fisher (Martes pennant); proposed rule. Federal Register 69(68): 18769-18792.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1991. Guidelines for Surveying Proposed Management Activities that may Impact Northern Spotted Owls.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC System).

Accessed on May 6, 2024 from https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper.

Accessed on May 5, 2024, from https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2012. Newhouse Ridge quadrangles. 7.5 minute topographic map.

Waian, L. B., Stendell, R. C. 1970. The white-tailed kite in California with observations of the Santa Barbara population. California Fish and Game 56: 188-198.

Western Bat Working Group (WBWG). 2024. Species Accounts. Accessed on May 1, 2024, from:
https://wbwg.org/species-accounts/

The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. 2024. Species Accounts. Accessed on May 1, 2024, from: https://xerces.org/
Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer Jr., and K. E. Mayer. 1988. California’s Wildlife Volume I – Amphibians and Reptiles. State of California Department of Fish and Game. 272pp.

Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White. 1990a. California’s Wildlife Volume II – Birds. State of California Department of Fish and Game. 732pp.

Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White. 1990b. California’s Wildlife Volume III – Mammals. State of California Department of Fish and Game. 407pp

Report Author:

Alicia Ives Ringstad
Alicia Ives Ringstad received a B.S. in Wildlife Management and Conservation from Humboldt State University in 2007, with studies including plant taxonomy. She is a Consulting Senior Wildlife Biologist with over 17 years professional wildlife biology, forestry, botany and environmental planning experience.

Ms. Ives Ringstad provides Botanical surveys and Biological Assessments for large and small projects requiring compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), these projects include timber harvesting, land conversion, minor and major subdivisions, and development plans/permits. Ms.

Ives Ringstad’s experience includes conducting wetland delineations that met the requirements of the US Army Corps of Engineers Technical Report (Y-87-1).

Sincerely,
Alicia Ives Ringstad
Biological and Botanical Program Manager
Jacobszoon & Associates, Inc.

Appendix A: Table of Potential for Special-Status Plants and Wildlife within the Study Area

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

IN THE STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDATIONS
Amphibians
northern redlegged frogCDFW: SSC R. aurora are often observed within humid forests, woodlands, wetlands, grasslands and stream sides in northwestern California, usually near dense riparian cover. This species is generally found near permanent water but can be found far from water in damp woods and meadows during the non-breeding season. Typical habitat types include Klamath/North coast flowing waters, riparian forest and woodland.

No Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area is not within the range of
this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species. IUCN: LC
Rana aurora
USFS: S
G4
S3
foothill yellowlegged frog -
north coast DPS
Rana boylii pop.
1 CDFW: SSC
BLM: S
USFS: S
G3TNRQ
S4
The foothill yellow-legged frog pop 1 (Northwest/North Coast clade) is found in or near partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats, including chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, Klamath/North Coast flowing waters, lower montane coniferous forest, meadows and seeps, riparian forest, riparian woodland and flowing waters. This species needs at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying and need at least 15 weeks to attain metamorphosis.

Low Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area falls within Low (0.33)
suitability for this species and
isn’t likely to provide the
required habitat for this
species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.
red-bellied newt
Taricha rivularis
CDFW: SSC
IUCN: LC
G2
S2
T. rivularis occur in coastal drainages from Humboldt County south to Sonoma County, inland to Lake County within broadleaved upland forest, North Coast coniferous forest, redwood, and riparian forest and woodland habitats. There is an isolated population of uncertain origin in Santa Clara County. Adults are active at the surface in moist environments. Transformed juveniles leave aquatic environments and go into hiding in underground shelters, often until they are ready to reproduce. This species will migrate over 1km to breed, typically in streams with moderate flow and clean, rocky substrate.

High Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area falls within High (1)
suitability for this species and
does provide the required
habitat for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

IN THE STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDA- TIONS
Avifauna
American
goshawk
Accipiter
atricapillus
CDFW: SSC
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
Throughout their range, whether at sea level or in alpine settings, American Goshawks nest in mature and old-growth forests with more than 60% closed canopy. They typically build nests in conifers, such as Douglas-fir, white fir, California red fir, ponderosa pine, western larch, and western hemlock, along with deciduous trees including aspens and paper birch ear breaks in the canopy, such as a forest trail, jeep road, or opening created by a downed tree, and prefer sites with a creek, pond, or lake nearby.

Moderate Potential.

According to the CWHR
Predicted Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area falls
within Low (0.11), Medium
(0.44), and High (1) suitability
for this species and may
provide the required habitat
for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.

Cooper’s hawk
Accipiter
cooperies
CDFW: WL
IUCN: LC
G5
S4
A. cooperii are forest and woodland birds, often in open, interrupted or marginal woodlands within cismontane woodland, riparian forest/woodland and upper montane coniferous forested habitats.

Nest sites mainly in riparian growths of deciduous trees as in canyon bottoms on river flood plains and in live oak trees.

Moderate Potential.

According to the CWHR
Predicted Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area falls
within Low (0.33), Medium
(0.66), and High (1) suitability
for this species and may
provide the required habitat
for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.
tricolored
blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
ST
BLM: S
CDFW: SSC
IUCN: EN

NABCI: RWL
USFWS: BCC
G1G2
S2
A. tricolor is largely endemic to California, most numerous in the Central Valley and vicinity within freshwater marsh, marsh and swamp. Swamp and wetland habitats. This species is highly colonial requiring open water, protected nest substrate and foraging area with insect prey within a few km of the colony.

No Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area is not within the range
of this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

IN THE STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDA- TIONS
grasshopper
sparrow
Ammodramus
savannarum
CDFW: SSC
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
A. savannarum are an uncommon and local, summer resident in valley and foothill grassland west of the Cascade- Sierra Nevada crest from Mendocino and Trinity Counties south to San Diego County. A. savannarum nests on the ground in dense grasslands on rolling hills, lowland plains, in valleys and on hillsides on lower mountain slopes in areas with a variety of native grasses and tall forbs and scattered shrubs for singing perches. Nests are typically found at the base of a small clump of overhanging grass or other vegetation, perhaps in close proximity to other breeding grasshopper sparrows, and this species may double or triple clutch.

Moderate Potential.

According to the CWHR
Predicted Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area falls
within Low (0.33) and
Medium (0.66) suitability for
this species. The Study Area
may provide suitable habitat
for the species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.
golden eagle
Aquila
chrysaetos
BLM: S
CDF: S
CDFW: FP, WL
IUCN: LC
G5
S3
Golden eagles are found primarily in rolling foothills, mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert in broadleaved upland forest, cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, Great Basin grassland, Great Basin scrub, lower montane coniferous forest, pinon and juniper woodlands, upper montane coniferous forest and valley foothill grassland habitats up to 12,000 feet. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of the range; also, large trees in open areas.

High Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area falls within High (0.77)
suitability for this species and
does provide the required
habitat for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.
great egret
Ardea alba
CDF: S
IUCN: LC
G5
S4
Great egrets are located in brackish marsh, estuary, freshwater marsh, marsh & swamp, riparian forest, and wetland habitats. They are colonial nesters in large trees. Rookery sites located near marshes, tide-flats, irrigated pastures, and margins of rivers and lakes.

No Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area is not within the range
of this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.
great blue heron
Ardea herodias
CDF: S
IUCN: LC
G5
S4
Great blue herons are located in brackish marsh, estuary, freshwater marsh, marsh and swamp, riparian forest and wetland habitats. They are colonial nesters in tall trees, cliffsides and sequestered spots on marshes. Rookery sites are located in close proximity to foraging areas; marshes, lake margins, tide-flats, rivers, streams and wet meadows.

Low Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area falls within Unranked
and Low (0.33) suitability for
this species and does not
provide the required habitat
for this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.

SPECIES STATUS* HABITAT REQUIREMENTS POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

IN THE STUDY AREA

RECOMMENDA- TIONS
western snowy
plover
Charadrius
nivosus nivosus
FT
CDFW: SSC
NABCI: RWL
G3T3
C. nivosus nivosus need sandy, gravelly or friable soils for nesting.

This species is located on sandy beaches, salt pond levees and shores of large alkali lakes in Great Basin standing waters, sandy shores and wetland habitats.

No Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area is not within the range
of this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.
northern harrier
Circus hudsonius
CDFW: SSC
IUCN: LC
USFWS: BCC
G5
S3
C. hudsonius are year-long residents of Mendocino and Lake County. They frequent coastal salt and freshwater marshes in coastal scrub, Great Basin grassland, marsh & swamp, riparian scrub, valley & foothill grassland, and wetland habitats. They nest on the ground in shrubby vegetation, usually at marsh edge; nest built of a large mound of sticks in wet areas.

Low Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area falls within Unranked
and Low (0.33) suitability for
this species and does not
provide the required habitat
for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.
western yellowbilled cuckoo
Coccyzus
americanus
occidentalis
FT
SE
BLM: S
NABCI: RWL
USFS: S
G5T2T3
S1
Western yellow-billed cuckoos breed in large blocks of riparian habitats (particularly woodlands with cottonwoods and willows).

Dense understory foliage appears to be an important factor in nest site selection. This species makes their nests in riparian jungles of willow, often mixed with cottonwoods, with lower story of blackberry, nettles, or wild grape. often between 3 to 90 feet (1 to 28 meters).

No Potential. According to
the CWHR Predicted Habitat
Suitability Map, the Study
Area is not within the range
of this species.

Not Present. There are no
recommendationsfor this
species.
white-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
BLM: S
CDFW: FP
IUCN: LC
G5
S3S4
E. leucurus forages in open grasslands, meadows, or marshes close to isolated, dense-topped trees for nesting and perching. This species is located in rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks and river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodland within cismontane woodland, marsh and swamp, riparian woodland, valley and grassland, and wetland habitats.

Moderate Potential.

According to the CWHR
Predicted Habitat Suitability
Map, the Study Area falls
within Low (0.33) and
Medium (0.66) suitability for
this species. The Study Area
may provide suitable habitat
for this species.

Not Observed: See Section 6
for general recommendations
for avifauna species.