Ventura Unified School District E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project

Draft Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration

February 2014

E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project

Draft Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration

Prepared by:

Ventura Unified School District 255 W Stanley Ave #100 Ventura, CA 93001 Contact: Ms. Terri Allison, Facilities Planner (805) 289-7981

Prepared with the assistance of:

Rincon Consultants, Inc. 180 North Ashwood Avenue Ventura, California 93003

February 2014

This report produced on 50% recycled paper with 50% post-consumer content.

E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

E.P. FOSTER HOUSE SITE OUTBUILDINGS DEMOLITION PROJECT

Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Initial Study 1. Project title ...... 1 2. Lead agency name and address ...... 1 3. Contact person and phone number ...... 1 4. Project location ...... 1 5. Project sponsor’s name and address ...... 1 6. General plan designation/zoning ...... 1 7. Description of project ...... 1 8. Surrounding land uses and setting ...... 2 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required ...... 2

Environmental Factors Affected ...... 6

Determination ...... 7

Environmental Checklist ...... 8 I. Aesthetics ...... 8 II. Agriculture Resources ...... 9 III. Air Quality ...... 10 IV. Biological Resources ...... 11 V. Cultural Resources...... 12 VI. Geology and Soils ...... 16 VII Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 18 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 21 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 22 X. Land Use and Planning ...... 24 XI. Mineral Resources ...... 25 XII. Noise ...... 25 XIII. Population and Housing ...... 27 XIV. Public Services ...... 28 XV. Recreation ...... 28 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...... 29 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ...... 30 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ...... 31

References ...... 33

Ventura Unified School District i E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

List of Tables

Table 1 Project Demolition Emissions ...... 11 Table 2 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ...... 26 Table 3 Typical Noise Levels at Construction Sites ...... 27

List of Figures

Figure 1 Regional Location ...... 3 Figure 2 Project Location ...... 4 Figure 3 Site Photographs ...... 5

Appendices

Appendix A Air Quality and GHG emissions modeling results Appendix B Historic Resources Report Appendix C Archaeological Survey Report

Ventura Unified School District ii E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

INITIAL STUDY

1. Project title:

E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project

2. Lead agency name and address:

Ventura Unified School District 255 W Stanley Ave #100 Ventura, CA 93001

3. Contact person and phone number:

Ms. Terri Allison, Facilities Planner Office: 805.289.7981

4. Project location:

The project site is located at 2717 North Ventura Avenue in the City of Ventura, California. The project site is approximately 7.44 acres and contains the Avenue School, not currently in use, and several small bungalow buildings used by the Head Start Program. The two outbuildings to be demolished are located on the northwest corner of the project site. Figure 1 shows the location of the site within the region and Figure 2 shows the project location on the site.

5. Project sponsor’s name and address:

Ventura Unified School District 255 W Stanley Ave #100 Ventura, CA 93001

6. General plan designation/zoning:

Public-Institutional / Single Family (R-1-1AC)

7. Description of project:

Currently, the 7.44-acre project area contains the Avenue School (not currently in use), remnants of the E.P. Foster residence, and two portable classrooms used by the Head Start Program. Previously, the project site housed the E.P. Foster Residence, a historic, locally listed building that was destroyed by fire in 2010. The residence consisted of a main house and several outbuildings.

The proposed project involves the demolition of two vacant outbuildings. The two outbuildings slated for demolition consist of a one-story building thought to have either been an employee residence or a guest house and an adjacent two-story building thought

Ventura Unified School District 1 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

to have served as a carriage house/garage with guest quarters above. The District now proposes to demolish the two outbuildings, as they are in serious disrepair, are unsafe, and have become an attractive nuisance. The outbuildings are located in the northwest corner of the project area.

8. Surrounding land uses and setting:

The two outbuildings are surrounded by undeveloped land to the north and west, two portable classrooms to the east, commercial and residential uses further east across Ventura Avenue, a vacant school immediately south, and commercial and industrial uses further south past the school.

Existing conditions onsite and in the site vicinity are illustrated on Figure 3.

9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:

City of Ventura – Demolition Permit

Ventura Unified School District 2 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Figure 1

Ventura Unified School District 3 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Figure 2

Ventura Unified School District 4 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Figure 3

Ventura Unified School District 5 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AFFECTED

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is “Potentially Significant” or “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Agriculture Aesthetics Air Quality Resources Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hydrology / Water Emissions Hazardous Materials Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services Recreation Utilities / Service Transportation/Traffic Systems

Ventura Unified School District 6 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

DETERMINATION:

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potential significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date

Printed Name

Ventura Unified School District 7 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than I. AESTHETICS – Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings. The outbuildings are located behind several bungalow buildings that are used by the Head Start Program. The proposed project does not involve construction of new uses; therefore, the proposed project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista. No impact would occur. b. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings. The proposed project would not damage any scenic resources such as trees or rock outcroppings. The proposed project is not located near a scenic highway (Caltrans, 2013). No impact would occur. c. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant, dilapidated outbuildings. The demolition of these buildings would not degrade the visual character of the project site. The removal of the dilapidated buildings would have a beneficial effect on the site and its surroundings. No impact would occur. d. The proposed project involves demolition of two existing outbuildings and would not involve construction of new uses. Therefore, there would be no new sources of light or glare. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 8 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Less Than Project; and forest carbon measurement Significant methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted Potentially With Less Than by the California Air Resources Board. -- Would Significant Mitigation Significant No the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? a-e. The project site does not contain any agricultural land, agriculturally zoned land, or land under Williamson Act contract. The project site would have no effect on forestland or the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 9 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the Less Than significance criteria established by the applicable air Significant quality management or air pollution control district Potentially With Less Than may be relied upon to make the following Significant Mitigation Significant No determinations. Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Result in a temporary increase in the concentration of criteria pollutants (i.e., as a result of the operation of machinery or grading activities)? e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

a. Generally, a project would conflict with or potentially obstruct implementation of an air quality plan if it would contribute to population growth in excess of that forecasted in the air quality management plan. The proposed project would involve demolition of two vacant outbuildings and would not generate any new residential demand. Consequently, the project would not contribute to an exceedance of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District’s projected population growth forecast. No impact would occur.

b, c. Long term operational emissions generated by a project would result from area source emissions or mobile emissions. Area sources include the use of natural gas, electricity, and landscaping maintenance equipment. Mobile emissions include emissions from vehicles associated with a project. Since the proposed project involves temporary demolition activities and does not involve construction of new uses, no new area source or mobile emissions would occur. No impact would occur.

d. Construction activities such as the operation of vehicles and equipment have the potential to generate fugitive dust (PM10) through the exposure of soil to wind erosion and dust entrainment. In addition, exhaust emissions associated with heavy construction equipment would potentially degrade air quality. Table 1 summarizes the estimated project emissions generated by demolition activities. Temporary demolition emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod v.2011.1 computer model.

Ventura Unified School District 10 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Table 1 Project Demolition Emissions

Pollutants ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5

Demolition 2.53 17.25 11.29 0.02 2.5 1.32

Source: CalEEMod 2011; see Appendix A for calculations

The VCAPCD does not have quantitative thresholds of significance for construction emissions since they are temporary. Rather, the VCAPCD recommends implementation of emission and dust control requirements for all construction projects with ROG or NOX emissions over 25 pounds per day and deems imposition of these mitigation measures as satisfactorily reducing significant impacts associated with temporary construction emissions to a less than significant level (VCAPCD, 2003). The proposed project does not exceed 25 pounds per day of ROG or NOX. VCAPCD Rule 55 regulates fugitive dust for any operation capable of generating fugitive dust, including demolition (VCAPCD, 2008). The proposed project would be required to comply with Rule 55. Following compliance with Rule 55, construction emissions would be less than significant. e. Certain population groups are considered particularly sensitive to air pollution. Sensitive receptors include health care facilities, retirement homes, school and playground facilities, and residential areas. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the classrooms located approximately 50 feet east of the buildings to be demolished.

As discussed in items b, c, and d above, the proposed project would not result in an exceedance of VCAPCD thresholds. Therefore, since the project would not exceed established thresholds, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during demolition activities. Impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant. f. The proposed project involves demolition of vacant outbuildings and would not generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. No impact would occur.

Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the No Significant With Significant project: Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

Ventura Unified School District 11 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the No Significant With Significant project: Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community

Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a-f. The proposed project involves demolition of vacant outbuildings. The proposed project would not involve any tree or landscaping removal. Therefore, demolition would not adversely affect sensitive plant or animal species, nor would it interfere with wildlife movement or the provisions of any adopted habitat conservation plan. No impact to biological resources would occur.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Ventura Unified School District 12 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

a. A Historic Resources Report was prepared by San Buenaventura Research Associates in October 2012 and is included as Appendix B. As mentioned in the project description, the proposed outbuildings slated for demolition were associated with the E.P. Foster Residence. These structures are a locally-listed resource recorded by the California Office of Historic Preservation as P-56-150491. However, the primary residence was destroyed by fire in 2010.

A resource is eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources if it meets any of the criteria for listing, which are: 1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c))

The criteria for determining eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) have been developed by the National Park Service. Eligible properties include districts, sites, buildings and structures: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

According to the City of Ventura (City of San Buenaventura Municipal Code, Sec. 24.455.120):

 Landmark means any real property such as building, structure, or archaeological excavation, or object that is unique or significant because of its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or aesthetic feeling, and is associated with: (a) Events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; (b) Lives of persons who made a meaningful contribution to national, state or local history; (c) Reflecting or exemplifying a particular period of the national, state or local history; (d) Embodying the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; (e) The work of one or more master builders, designers, artists or architects whose talents influenced their historical period, or work that otherwise possesses high artistic value; (f) Representing a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (g) Yielding, or likely to yield, information important to national, state or local history or prehistory.

Ventura Unified School District 13 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

 Point of interest means any real property or object: (a) That is the site of a building, structure or object that no longer exists but was associated with historic events, important persons, or embodied a distinctive character of architectural style; (b) That has historic significance, but was altered to the extent that the integrity of the original workmanship, materials or style is substantially compromised; (c) That is the site of a historic event which has no distinguishable characteristics other than that a historic event occurred there and the historic significance is sufficient to justify the establishment of a historic landmark. (Ord. No. 2005-004, § 3, 5-2-05)

National and California Registers: Significance, Eligibility and Integrity

The Foster property does not appear to be eligible for the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion A and Criterion 1 (significant historical events). While the site is generally associated with the development of agriculture on Ventura Avenue, the available evidence does not suggest that it played any notable role in that development.

The property does appear to be potentially eligible under Criterion B and Criterion 2 (lives of persons significant in our past) for its association with E.P. Foster and Orpha Woods Foster and to a lesser degree, their daughter Orpha Pearl Foster. The Fosters were important locally throughout Ventura County as community leaders and notable philanthropists. They were responsible for the construction and development of major buildings, parks and institutions in the community. E.P. and Orpha Foster purchased the first 32 acres that became E.P. Foster Park and purchased 65 acres of land that became Seaside Park, donating them to the County of Ventura. The Fosters purchased the land and donated funds to construct the Ventura Library/City Hall building in 1921, and were the major donors to, and forces behind, the construction of the Ventura Hospital, later renamed in honor E.P. Foster. This institution remains in operation today as Community Memorial Hospital.

However, the integrity of the E.P. Foster property is not strong enough for eligibility to the National Register due to the loss of the main house. Although the landscape features are intact, the loss of the main house reduces the integrity to the level of insignificant.

Local Significance and Eligibility

As discussed above, the subject property does not appear to be associated with significant (a) events, or (c) to reflect or exemplify a particular period of history. It does appear to be associated with (b) the lives of significant persons. It does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or (e) represent the work of a master builder, designer, artist or architect, especially due to the loss of the main residence. This property does not (f) appear to represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (i.e., have the potential to contribute to a historic district).

The E.P. Foster property appears to be eligible as a local landmark under Criterion (b) for its association with E.P. Foster. In addition to being significant under one of the designation criteria, the City of Ventura ordinance requires that a property also be “significant because of its

Ventura Unified School District 14 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or aesthetic feeling.” Because of the loss of the main residence and the lack of integrity of the extant buildings, the property today is significant only for its remaining landscape features. The numerous specimen trees planted on the property by E.P. Foster represent his interest in horticulture and are directly related to his contributions in this field. The loss of the house and the alterations to the remaining outbuildings reduce the setting and result in a loss of design, materials and workmanship. However the remaining landscape features, including the long tree-lined driveway, specimen trees, fountain and lawn, are in their original locations and retain integrity of design, setting and materials. Consequently, the E.P. Foster property and landscape features appear to be the best extant example of Foster’s interest in and promotion of horticulture within the City of Ventura.

Conclusion

The E.P. Foster property does not appear to be eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR, but does appear eligible for designation as a City Landmark. The property is significant for its landscape features but not for the two remaining outbuildings. Therefore, demolition of the two outbuildings will not constitute an adverse project impact, as both buildings were found to be ineligible due to extensive alterations. However, the property in general has been subject to a lengthy period of vandalism and decline, which resulted in the loss of the E.P. Foster residence to fire and the outbuildings falling into their present state of deterioration. While the significant landscape features (specimen trees, tree-lined driveway, fountain and lawn) will not be altered as a result of the proposed project, the project does not include any plan for the continued maintenance of these features that would serve to arrest further decline. If these features were lost, the property would likely become ineligible as a City Landmark. This is a potentially significant impact. Therefore, Mitigation Measure CR-1 is required.

CR- 1 Identification and Maintenance Report. An Identification and Maintenance report shall be prepared for the property. The report shall document the species, condition, location and approximate ages of the significant landscape features on the property. Significance for the historic landscape features shall be determined based on a historically appropriate period of significance for the property. The maintenance component of the plan shall include means for addressing immediate and long-term landscape maintenance issues for the landscape features. The report shall be prepared by a qualified historic preservation professional in conjunction with a qualified arborist or landscape architect. The report shall include a scaled plan illustrating the location of the plantings and features. The Identification and Maintenance Plan shall be completed within one year after the demolition of the buildings proposed to be removed.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1, impacts to historic resources would be less than significant. b, c. An Archaeological Survey Report was conducted by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in November 2012 and is included as Appendix C. The report found no evidence of cultural resources related to Native Americans or other traditional groups within or adjacent to the project area. No historic archaeological resources were identified in the project area. A historical refuse deposit

Ventura Unified School District 15 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

was observed outside the project area but is not located on the subject property and would not be impacted by this project.

Although one Native American contact recommended archaeological and Native American monitoring, the nearest known Native American cultural resource is approximately 0.3 miles away and the area is considered to have low sensitivity for prehistoric or Native American cultural resources.

In the unlikely event that such resources are unearthed during demolition, applicable regulatory requirements pertaining to the handling and treatment of such resources would be followed. Work in the immediate area must halt and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983) must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under NHPA, additional work such as data recovery excavation may be warranted. Assuming compliance with applicable regulations, impacts would be less than significant. d. The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the Ventura County Coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Assuming compliance with these regulations, impacts would be less than significant.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?

Ventura Unified School District 16 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

a (i-iv). The proposed project involves demolition of vacant outbuildings. The proposed project does not involve any construction or new uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects from ground rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, liquefaction, or landslides. No impact would occur. b. The outbuildings slated for demolition are located on a bluff that is subject to erosion. The amount of material potentially eroded from the site during demolition activities could be greater than under existing conditions as removal of the structures would mean soils would be less protected from any direct rainfall impact, and significant wind events. While the natural seed bank in the area would be expected to colonize this area eventually, the disturbed nature of the soils would allow them to more readily erode in the short-term. This is a potentially significant impact. Therefore, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 is required.

GEO-1 Following completion of demolition activities, exposed soils shall be amended with erosion control seeding and mulching. c. Demolition of existing outbuildings would not cause instability that would potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse Therefore, no impact would occur. d. The proposed project involves demolition of two existing outbuildings and would not involve construction of new uses. Therefore, no life or property would be exposed to construction on expansive soils. No impact would occur. e. The proposed project does not involve new construction. Septic systems would not be used. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 17 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Global Climate Change

Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period of time. The term “climate change” is often used interchangeably with the term “global warming,” but “climate change” is preferred to “global warming” because it helps convey that there are other changes in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates in historical records identifying temperature changes that have occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate is continuously changing, as evidenced by repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling documented in the geologic record. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed acceleration in the rate of warming during the past 150 years. Per the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007), the understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has led to a high confidence (90% or greater chance) that the global average net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures, since the mid-20th century, is likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations (IPCC, 2007).

Greenhouse Gases (GHGs)

Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation.

Ventura Unified School District 18 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely by- products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat- absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (California Environmental Protection Agency [CalEPA], 2006). Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWPs). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emissions, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2E), and is the amount of a GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a GWP of one. By contrast, methane (CH4) has a GWP of 21, meaning its global warming effect is 21 times greater than carbon dioxide on a molecule per molecule basis (IPCC, 1997).

The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat trapping effect of GHG, Earth’s surface would be about 34° C cooler (CalEPA, 2006). However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations. The following discusses the primary GHGs of concern.

Carbon Dioxide. The global carbon cycle is made up of large carbon flows and reservoirs. Billions of tons of carbon in the form of CO2 are absorbed by oceans and living biomass (i.e., sinks) and are emitted to the atmosphere annually through natural processes (i.e., sources). When in equilibrium, carbon fluxes among these various reservoirs are roughly balanced (United States Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA], April 2012). CO2 was the first GHG demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration, with the first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th Century. Concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have risen approximately 40% since the industrial revolution. The global atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 parts per million (ppm) to 391 ppm in 2011 (IPCC, 2007; Oceanic and Atmospheric Association [NOAA], 2010). The average annual CO2 concentration growth rate was larger between 1995 and 2005 (average: 1.9 ppm per year) than it has been since the beginning of continuous direct atmospheric measurements (1960–2005 average: 1.4 ppm per year), although there is year-to-year variability in growth rates (NOAA, 2010). Currently, CO2 represents an estimated 82.8% of total GHG emissions (Department of Energy [DOE] Energy Information Administration [EIA], August 2010). The largest source of CO2, and of overall GHG emissions, is fossil fuel combustion.

Methane. Methane (CH4) is an effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric concentration is less than that of CO2 and its lifetime in the atmosphere is limited to 10 to 12 years. It has a global warming potential (GWP) approximately 21 times that of CO2. Over the last 250 years, the concentration of CH4 in the atmosphere has increased by 148 percent (IPCC, 2007), although emissions have declined from 1990 levels. Anthropogenic sources of CH4 include enteric fermentation associated with domestic livestock, landfills, natural gas and petroleum systems, agricultural activities, coal mining, wastewater treatment, stationary and mobile combustion, and certain industrial processes (U.S. EPA, April 2012).

Ventura Unified School District 19 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Nitrous Oxide. Concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O) began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution and continue to increase at a relatively uniform growth rate (NOAA, 2010). N2O is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions that occur in fertilizers that contain nitrogen, fossil fuel combustion, and other chemical processes. Use of these fertilizers has increased over the last century. Agricultural soil management and mobile source fossil fuel combustion are the major sources of N2O emissions. The GWP of nitrous oxide is approximately 310 times that of CO2.

Fluorinated Gases (HFCS, PFCS and SF6). Fluorinated gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfurhexafluoride (SF6), are powerful GHGs that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are used as substitutes for ozone- depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and halons, which have been regulated since the mid-1980s because of their ozone-destroying potential and are phased out under the Montreal Protocol (1987) and Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Electrical transmission and distribution systems account for most SF6 emissions, while PFC emissions result from semiconductor manufacturing and as a by-product of primary aluminum production. Fluorinated gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities than CO2, CH4, and N2O, but these compounds have much higher GWPs. SF6 is the most potent GHG the IPCC has evaluated. a, b. The proposed project does not involve any construction of new uses. Therefore, there would be no operational emissions (stationary or mobile sources) associated with the project. However, there would be temporary emissions related to the operation of vehicles and equipment used in the demolition process.

GHG emissions would be considered significant if project-generated GHGs exceed suggested thresholds. However, neither VCAPCD nor the City of Ventura have adopted GHG emissions thresholds, and no GHG emissions reduction plan with established GHG emissions reduction strategies have been adopted in the City or County. However, VCAPCD staff has examined options for GHG thresholds for CEQA documents. Among the approaches discussed, VCAPCD prefers consistency with the South Coast AQMD (VCAPCD, 2011). The South Coast AQMD is considering a tiered approach with locally adopted GHG reduction plans followed by GHG threshold values set to capture 90 percent of project GHG emissions by project type. SCAQMD’s current proposed threshold is 3,000 metric tons per year (SCAQMD, “Proposed Tier 3 Screening Levels – Residential/Commercial Projects, September 2010). It is important to note that the VCAPCD does not recommend adoption of this threshold for any other purpose at this time, but it is used for this analysis for the reasons noted above.

Based on the maximum daily CO2 emissions generated by construction of the proposed project, demolition of the outbuildings would generate an estimated 7.97 metric tons of CO2E (see Appendix A). Once the demolition is completed, emissions would cease. Since emissions would be less than 3,000 metric tons CO2e impacts would be less than significant.

Ventura Unified School District 20 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Significant VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Potentially With Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact 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 for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings and would not introduce any unusual hazardous materials to the area. Due to the age of the outbuildings, the structures may contain asbestos or lead-based paints. Demolition of these buildings if these materials are present could potentially expose workers to hazards that would adversely affect human health and safety. However, the proposed project would be required to comply with Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Rule 62.7 (Asbestos Demolition and Renovation), the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) regulations regarding lead-based materials, and California Code of Regulations, §1532.1 which requires testing, monitoring, containment, and disposal of lead-based materials such that exposure

Ventura Unified School District 21 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

levels do not exceed CalOSHA standards. Assuming compliance with these rules and regulations, impacts would be less than significant. b, d. The following databases were checked for known hazardous materials contamination on the project site or in its vicinity:

 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) database  Geotracker search for leaking underground storage tanks, Spills-Leaks-Investigations-Cleanups (SLIC) and Landfill sites  California, State of, Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database  Cortese list of Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites  EPA Brownfields List

The project site was not listed on any of these databases. The project site is not included on any list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Further, the proposed project does not involve any construction or new uses so no persons would be exposed to hazards. No impact would occur. c. The outbuildings slated to be demolished are located approximately 100 feet from a buidlings used by the Head Start Program. However, the project does not involve any construction or new uses and therefore operation of the project would not involve the use or transport of hazardous materials. Therefore, the nearby school would not be adversely affected. Impacts would be less than significant. e, f. The project site is not located in the vicinity of a public or private airstrip. No impact would occur. g. The proposed demolition of two vacant outbuildings would not interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. No impact would occur. h. The proposed project does not involve construction or new uses and therefore would not expose people or structures to wildland fire hazards. No impact would occur.

Less Than Significant IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Potentially With Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

Ventura Unified School District 22 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Significant IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Potentially With Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Result in temporary modifications to existing drainage patterns that may increase the flow rate of stormwater, violate water quality discharge requirements, or result in substantial erosion on or off-site due to construction activities? g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? i) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? a, c-g. The proposed project involves demolition of existing outbuildings and does not involve construction of any new uses. The proposed project would not substantially alter drainage patterns. The proposed project may decrease runoff since demolition of the existing buildings would remove impervious surfaces at the site. Removal of existing buildings would not affect water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.

Ventura Unified School District 23 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

b. Regional water demand is primarily a function of population growth. The project would not increase the region’s population and, in turn, the regional demand for potable water. (Please refer to Section XVI, Utilities and Service Systems, for further discussion of this impact.) The proposed project would not interfere with groundwater recharge because the proposed project would decrease the amount of impermeable surface at the site. Therefore, the project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. No impact would occur. h-j. The project site is located in Zone X, which is an area outside of the 100-year flood zone (FEMA Panel No. 06111C0745E, 2010). The project would not involve any housing and would not involve construction of a structure that would impede flood flows. No impact would occur. k. The project site is over two miles from the Pacific Ocean and is not located within a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow hazard zone (City of Ventura, 2005). No impact would occur.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than X. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the Significant Mitigation Significant No project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? a. The proposed project does not involve any construction or new uses that would divide an established community. No impact would occur. b. The proposed project does not involve any construction or new uses. Therefore, the project would have no impact relating to consistency with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations. c. The project site is not subject to an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 24 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact 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?

a, b. The project site is not located in an area with known minerals or aggregate resources (City of Ventura General Plan Final EIR). Further, the demolition of two outbuildings would not affect mineral resources. No impact would occur.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than XII. NOISE – Would the project result in: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity due to construction activities above levels existing without the project? 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Ventura Unified School District 25 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

a, c. The proposed project does not involve any construction of new land uses. Therefore, there will be no operational noise and no increase in noise above ambient levels. Further, the proposed project does not involve any residential uses; therefore, no persons would be exposed to noise in excess of standards. No impact would occur. b. Vibration is a unique form of noise because its energy is carried through buildings, structures, and the ground, whereas noise is simply carried through the air. Thus, vibration is generally felt rather than heard. Some vibration effects can be caused by noise, e.g. the rattling of windows from truck pass-bys. This phenomenon is caused by the coupling of the acoustic energy at frequencies that are close to the resonant frequency of the material being vibrated. Typically, groundborne vibration generated by manmade activities attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases and vibration rapidly diminishes in amplitude with distance from the source. The ground motion caused by vibration is measured as particle velocity in inches per second and is referenced as vibration decibels (VdB) in the U.S.

The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for many people. Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration in the vicinity of the proposed project are construction equipment, traffic on rough roads, and heavy duty vehicle traffic on roadways. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration from traffic is barely perceptible.The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration velocity, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings (Federal Transit Administration, 2006).

Table 2 identifies various vibration velocity levels for the types of equipment that would operate at the project site during demolition.

Table 2 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment

Approximate VdB

Equipment 25 Feet 50 Feet 100 Feet 200 Feet

Large Bulldozer 87 81 75 69

Loaded Trucks 86 80 74 68

Small Bulldozer 58 52 46 40

Source: FTA, May 2006

Based on the information presented in Table 2, vibration levels could temporarily and intermittently reach up to approximately 75 VdB at the school approximately 100 feet east of the outbuildings and 69 dBA at the residences approximately 200 feet northeast of the outbuildings. Therefore, vibration levels would not exceed 85 VdB which is the level at which, according to the FTA, would be considered annoying even for infrequent events at institutional land uses such as schools. In addition, vibration levels would not exceed the groundborne velocity threshold level of 80 VdB established by the Federal Railway Administration for

Ventura Unified School District 26 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

residences where people normally sleep. Further, the Ventura Municipal Code prohibits construction activities between the hours of 8:00 pm and 7:00 am. Therefore, construction would not occur during recognized sleep hours for residences. As such, vibration effects would be less than significant. d. Demolition of the existing outbuildings is expected to take approximately 5 days, or one work week. Temporary noise levels associated with demolition shown in Table 3 could affect the school 100 feet east of the outbuildings and the residences 200 feet northeast of the outbuildings. The Ventura Municipal Code prohibits construction activities between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM (Sec. 10.650.150). Construction-related noise outside of these hours would be considered a significant impact. Assuming compliance with these time restrictions, construction noise impacts would be less than significant.

Table 3 Typical Noise Levels at Construction Sites

Average Noise Level at Average Noise Level at Equipment Onsite 100 Feet (dBA) 200 Feet (dBA)

Tractors 74 68 Haul Trucks 82 46

Hydraulic Backhoe 80 74

Hydraulic Excavators 80 74

Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., May 2006. e, f. The project site is not in the vicinity of any public or private airport. Therefore, no impact related to aircraft noise would occur.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the Significant Mitigation Significant No project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Induce substantial 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 housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a-c. The proposed project does not include the construction of residential units. The project involves the demolition of two vacant outbuildings. Because the project does not include the

Ventura Unified School District 27 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

construction of residential units or any job-creating uses, no increase in the City’s population would occur. The project would therefore have no impact related to inducing substantial population growth or require the construction of housing. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i. Fire protection? ii. Police protection? iii. Schools? iv. Parks? v. Other public facilities? a (i-v). The project would not lead to any increase in population or jobs and thus would not create new demand for or increase the use of fire facilities, police facilities, schools, parks, or other public facilities. No impact would occur.

Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than XV. RECREATION Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact 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? a, b. The proposed project would not include any housing and would not increase the population in the City (discussed above under Section XIII, Population and Housing). As such,

Ventura Unified School District 28 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

the project would not increase the use of parks and would not require the development of new park facilities. No impact would occur.

Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact

XVI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing a measure of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways, and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bikeways, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise substantially decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? a, b, f. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings and does not involve any construction of new uses. Therefore, the proposed project will not affect traffic patterns or conflict with any applicable transportation plan. No impact would occur. c. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings and would not affect air traffic patterns. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 29 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

d, e. The proposed project does not involve any construction of new uses; therefore, it would not increase hazards, create any incompatible uses, or result in inadequate emergency access. No impact would occur.

Less Than Significant XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Potentially With Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

a, b, e. The proposed project would involve demolition of two vacant outbuildings and would not generate wastewater. No impact associated with the need for additional wastewater generation and treatment would occur.

c. Demolition of two vacant outbuildings would an area of impermeable surface at the site. Therefore, the amount and rate of runoff from the project site would likely decrease as a result

Ventura Unified School District 30 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

of the proposed project. Existing storm drain facilities would not be adversely affected. Impacts would be less than significant. d. The project would involve demolition of two vacant outbuildings and would not include any water-consuming uses. The project does not involve the construction of residences that would increase the region’s population and, in turn, the regional demand for potable water. Therefore, no impact would occur. f, g. The project would include demolition of two vacant outbuildings. Once demolished, the demolition waste would need to be transported to a landfill and property disposed of. There would be a temporary increase in solid waste at area landfills. Based on the size of the outbuildings, the solid waste generated by the project would not be a substantial increase. Impacts would be less than significant.

Less Than XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF Significant SIGNIFICANCE Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact 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, 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? a. The proposed project would not significantly 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, 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 prehistory. As discussed under item V, Cultural Resources, Mitigation Measure CR-1 is required to reduce impacts to historic resources. In addition, as discussed under item VI, Geology and Soils, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 is required

Ventura Unified School District 31 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

to reduce short term impacts related to potential erosion of soils. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. b. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings. It does not involve any construction or addition of new uses. Therefore, impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. c. The proposed project involves demolition of two vacant outbuildings. The project would not adversely affect human beings. No impact would occur.

Ventura Unified School District 32 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

REFERENCES

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. EnviroStor database. Accessed 2011. Available online at: http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/.

California Department of Transportation (CalTrans). http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/cahisys.htm

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), March 2006. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/2006-04- 03_FINAL_CAT_REPORT_EXECSUMMARY.PDF

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel No. 06111C0745E, 2010.

Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006. Prepared for the Federal Transit Administration.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2007: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Annual Greenhouse Gas Index. September 2010. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/

Rincon Consultants, Inc. Site visit February 2013.

Rincon Consultants, Inc. November 2012. Archaeological Survey Report, 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, CA.

San Buenaventura Research Associates. October 2012. Historic Resources Report, 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, CA.

United States, Environmental Protection Agency. Brownfields Database. Accessed February 2013. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/bms/index2.html.

United States, Environmental Protection Agency. CERCLIS Superfund Site Search. Accessed February 2013. Available online at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/srchsites.cfm.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2010. U. S. EPA #430-R-11-005. April 2012. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html

Ventura Unified School District 33 E.P. Foster House Site Outbuildings Demolition Project Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). 2008. Rule 55. http://www.vcapcd.org/Rulebook/Reg4/RULE%2055.pdf

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). October 2003. Air Quality Assessment Guidelines. http://www.vcapcd.org/pubs/Planning/VCAQGuidelines.pdf

Ventura, City of. 2005. General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.

Ventura Unified School District 34

Appendix A Air Quality and GHG Emissions Modeling Results

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 2/21/2013

VUSD Outbuilding Demo Ventura County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage

Land Uses Size Metric

Apartments Low Rise 1 Dwelling Unit

1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.6 Utility Company Southern California Edison

Climate Zone 8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments

Project Characteristics - Land Use - Demolition -

2.0 Emissions Summary

1 of 24 2.1 Overall Construction

Unmitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Year tons/yr MT/yr

2011 0.17 1.11 0.66 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 102.93 102.93 0.01 0.00 103.20

Total 0.17 1.11 0.66 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 102.93 102.93 0.01 0.00 103.20

Mitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Year tons/yr MT/yr

2011 0.17 1.11 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 102.93 102.93 0.01 0.00 103.20

Total 0.17 1.11 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 102.93 102.93 0.01 0.00 103.20

2 of 24 2.2 Overall Operational

Unmitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Area 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.03 2.03 0.00 0.00 2.05

Mobile 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.09 8.09 0.00 0.00 8.10

Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 10.51 10.60 0.01 0.00 10.81

3 of 24 2.2 Overall Operational

Mitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Area 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.03 2.03 0.00 0.00 2.05

Mobile 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.09 8.09 0.00 0.00 8.10

Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 10.51 10.60 0.01 0.00 10.81

3.0 Construction Detail

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

4 of 24 3.2 Demolition - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.69 6.69 0.00 0.00 6.71

Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.69 6.69 0.00 0.00 6.71

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.82

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26

5 of 24 3.2 Demolition - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.69 6.69 0.00 0.00 6.71

Total 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 6.69 6.69 0.00 0.00 6.71

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.82

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.26 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26

6 of 24 3.3 Site Preparation - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Total 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02

7 of 24 3.3 Site Preparation - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Total 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02

8 of 24 3.4 Grading - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.34 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.34

Total 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.34 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.34

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09

9 of 24 3.4 Grading - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.34 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.34

Total 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.34 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.34

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09

10 of 24 3.5 Building Construction - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Off-Road 0.13 0.96 0.55 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 88.22 88.22 0.01 0.00 88.44

Total 0.13 0.96 0.55 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 88.22 88.22 0.01 0.00 88.44

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

11 of 24 3.5 Building Construction - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Off-Road 0.13 0.96 0.55 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 88.22 88.22 0.01 0.00 88.44

Total 0.13 0.96 0.55 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 88.22 88.22 0.01 0.00 88.44

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.44

12 of 24 3.6 Paving - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.19 3.19 0.00 0.00 3.20

Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.19 3.19 0.00 0.00 3.20

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40

13 of 24 3.6 Paving - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Off-Road 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.19 3.19 0.00 0.00 3.20

Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.19 3.19 0.00 0.00 3.20

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40

14 of 24 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Archit. Coating 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Total 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

15 of 24 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Archit. Coating 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Total 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.0 Mobile Detail

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 16 of 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.09 8.09 0.00 0.00 8.10

Unmitigated 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.09 8.09 0.00 0.00 8.10

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

4.2 Trip Summary Information

Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT

Apartments Low Rise 6.59 7.16 6.07 18,228 18,228 Total 6.59 7.16 6.07 18,228 18,228

4.3 Trip Type Information

Miles Trip %

Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Apartments Low Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 32.90 18.00 49.10

5.0 Energy Detail

17 of 24 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04 Mitigated Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04 Unmitigated NaturalGas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 Mitigated NaturalGas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 Unmitigated Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

Unmitigated

NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Land Use kBTU tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 18826.6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 Rise Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01

18 of 24 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

Mitigated

NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Land Use kBTU tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 18826.6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 Rise Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.01

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity

Unmitigated

Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Land Use kWh tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 3539.58 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04 Rise Total 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04

19 of 24 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity

Mitigated

Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Land Use kWh tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 3539.58 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04 Rise Total 1.03 0.00 0.00 1.04

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Unmitigated 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

20 of 24 6.2 Area by SubCategory

Unmitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr

Architectural 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Mitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr

Architectural 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

21 of 24 7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

Unmitigated 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

7.2 Water by Land Use

Unmitigated

Indoor/Outdoor ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use

Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 0.065154 / 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44 Rise 0.0410754 Total 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

22 of 24 7.2 Water by Land Use

Mitigated

Indoor/Outdoor ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use

Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 0.065154 / 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44 Rise 0.0410754 Total 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

Category/Year

ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

Unmitigated 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

23 of 24 8.2 Waste by Land Use

Unmitigated

Waste ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed

Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 0.46 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21 Rise Total 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

Mitigated

Waste ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed

Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Low 0.46 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21 Rise Total 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.21

9.0 Vegetation

24 of 24 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 Date: 2/21/2013

VUSD Outbuilding Demo Ventura County, Summer

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage

Land Uses Size Metric

Apartments Low Rise 1 Dwelling Unit

1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.6 Utility Company Southern California Edison

Climate Zone 8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments

Project Characteristics - Land Use - Demolition -

2.0 Emissions Summary

1 of 20 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)

Unmitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Year lb/day lb/day

2011 6.82 19.12 11.29 0.02 1.17 1.40 2.48 0.42 1.40 1.67 0.00 1,955.72 0.00 0.25 0.00 1,960.91

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Mitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Year lb/day lb/day

2011 6.82 19.12 11.29 0.02 0.76 1.40 2.01 0.42 1.40 1.67 0.00 1,955.72 0.00 0.25 0.00 1,960.91

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2 of 20 2.2 Overall Operational

Unmitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Area 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11

Mobile 0.04 0.07 0.33 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.83 0.00 55.88

Total 0.07 0.07 0.42 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.05 0.00 0.00 62.14

Mitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Area 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11

Mobile 0.04 0.07 0.33 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.83 0.00 55.88

Total 0.07 0.07 0.42 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.05 0.00 0.00 62.14

3.0 Construction Detail

3 of 20 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Total 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 0.50 1.25 1.75 0.00 1.25 1.25 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.12 1.33 0.75 0.00 0.54 0.06 0.60 0.01 0.06 0.06 181.56 0.01 181.68

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

Total 0.19 1.40 1.43 0.00 0.67 0.06 0.73 0.01 0.06 0.07 284.71 0.02 284.97

4 of 20 3.2 Demolition - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 0.00 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Total 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 0.50 1.25 1.75 0.00 1.25 1.25 0.00 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.12 1.33 0.75 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.06 181.56 0.01 181.68

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

Total 0.19 1.40 1.43 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.06 0.07 284.71 0.02 284.97

5 of 20 3.3 Site Preparation - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.53 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 1.98 14.38 8.76 0.01 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 1,402.65 0.18 1,406.38

Total 1.98 14.38 8.76 0.01 0.53 0.98 1.51 0.00 0.98 0.98 1,402.65 0.18 1,406.38

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.04 0.03 0.34 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.58 0.00 51.64

Total 0.04 0.03 0.34 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.58 0.00 51.64

6 of 20 3.3 Site Preparation - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.53 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 1.98 14.38 8.76 0.01 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1,402.65 0.18 1,406.38

Total 1.98 14.38 8.76 0.01 0.53 0.98 1.51 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 1,402.65 0.18 1,406.38

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.04 0.03 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.58 0.00 51.64

Total 0.04 0.03 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.58 0.00 51.64

7 of 20 3.4 Grading - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.00

Off-Road 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Total 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 0.75 1.25 2.00 0.41 1.25 1.66 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

Total 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

8 of 20 3.4 Grading - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Fugitive Dust 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.00

Off-Road 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 0.00 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Total 2.34 15.85 9.86 0.02 0.75 1.25 2.00 0.41 1.25 1.66 0.00 1,476.12 0.21 1,480.54

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

Total 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 103.15 0.01 103.29

9 of 20 3.5 Building Construction - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Off-Road 2.60 19.11 10.99 0.02 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1,945.40 0.23 1,950.29

Total 2.60 19.11 10.99 0.02 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1,945.40 0.23 1,950.29

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.32 0.00 10.33

Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.32 0.00 10.33

10 of 20 3.5 Building Construction - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Off-Road 2.60 19.11 10.99 0.02 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 0.00 1,945.40 0.23 1,950.29

Total 2.60 19.11 10.99 0.02 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 0.00 1,945.40 0.23 1,950.29

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.32 0.00 10.33

Total 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.32 0.00 10.33

11 of 20 3.6 Paving - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Off-Road 2.63 16.21 9.93 0.02 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1,408.52 0.24 1,413.47

Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 2.63 16.21 9.93 0.02 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1,408.52 0.24 1,413.47

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.13 0.12 1.23 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.01 185.68 0.01 185.92

Total 0.13 0.12 1.23 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.01 185.68 0.01 185.92

12 of 20 3.6 Paving - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Off-Road 2.63 16.21 9.93 0.02 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 0.00 1,408.52 0.24 1,413.47

Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 2.63 16.21 9.93 0.02 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 0.00 1,408.52 0.24 1,413.47

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.13 0.12 1.23 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 185.68 0.01 185.92

Total 0.13 0.12 1.23 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 185.68 0.01 185.92

13 of 20 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2011

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Archit. Coating 6.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.56 3.37 1.98 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 281.19 0.05 282.25

Total 6.81 3.37 1.98 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 281.19 0.05 282.25

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

14 of 20 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2011

Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Archit. Coating 6.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Off-Road 0.56 3.37 1.98 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 281.19 0.05 282.25

Total 6.81 3.37 1.98 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 281.19 0.05 282.25

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.0 Mobile Detail

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 15 of 20 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Mitigated 0.04 0.07 0.33 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.83 0.00 55.88

Unmitigated 0.04 0.07 0.33 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.83 0.00 55.88

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

4.2 Trip Summary Information

Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT

Apartments Low Rise 6.59 7.16 6.07 18,228 18,228 Total 6.59 7.16 6.07 18,228 18,228

4.3 Trip Type Information

Miles Trip %

Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Apartments Low Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 32.90 18.00 49.10

5.0 Energy Detail

16 of 20 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

NaturalGas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11 Mitigated NaturalGas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11 Unmitigated Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

Unmitigated

NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day

Apartments Low 51.5798 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11 Rise Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11

17 of 20 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

Mitigated

NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day

Apartments Low 0.0515798 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11 Rise Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.07 0.00 0.00 6.11

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

Category lb/day lb/day

Mitigated 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

Unmitigated 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

18 of 20 6.2 Area by SubCategory

Unmitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

SubCategory lb/day lb/day

Architectural 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15

Total 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

Mitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2

SubCategory lb/day lb/day

Architectural 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15

Total 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15

19 of 20 7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

9.0 Vegetation

20 of 20

Appendix B Historic Resources Report

Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue Ventura, CA

17 October 2012

Prepared by: Prepared for:

Rincon Consultants, Inc. 180 North Ashwood Avenue Ventura, CA 93003 Executive Summary This report was prepared for the purpose of assisting the Ventura Unified School District and the City of Ven- tura in their compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it relates to historic re- sources. The proposed project is the demolition of two buildings located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, on a property owned by the Ventura Unified School District. This property was originally the home of the E.P. Foster family. [Figure 1]

This report assesses the historical and architectural significance of potentially eligible historic properties in accordance with the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Re- sources (CRHR) Criteria for Evaluation, and City of Ventura criteria.

This report was prepared by San Buenaventura Research Associates of Santa Paula, California, Judy Triem, His- torian; and Mitch Stone, Preservation Planner, for the Rincon Consultants, Inc., and is based on a field inves- tigation and research conducted in September and October 2012, as well as an earlier Phase I Historic Re- sources Report prepared for the property by SBRA in 2003. The conclusions contained herein represent the professional opinions of San Buenaventura Research Associates, and are based on the factual data available at the time of its preparation, the application of the appropriate local, state and federal regulations, and best professional practices.

Summary of Findings The property evaluated in this report was found to be ineligible for listing on the NRHP and CRHR, but eligible for designation as a City of Ventura Landmark for its landscape features. The two outbuildings proposed for demolition were found to be ineligible for City of Ventura Landmark status because of loss of integrity. While no other changes other than the demolitions are currently proposed, the potential for significant adverse cu- mulative impacts was identified, due to the history of inadequate maintenance on the property. Mitigation was recommended to address this issue.

Report Contents 1. Administrative Setting 1 City of San Buenaventura Municipal Code, Sec. 24.455.120 2. Impact Thresholds and Mitigation 3 3. Historical Setting 4 General Historical Context Site-Specific Context Eugene Preston Foster Orpha Woods Foster Orpha Pearl Foster 4. Potential Historic Resources 9 Dates of Construction/Alterations Potentially Historic Properties in the Vicinity 5. Eligibility of Historic Resources 12 National and California Registers: Significance, Eligibility and Integrity Integrity Discussion Local Significance and Eligibility Conclusion 6. Project Impacts 15 7. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts 15 Project Mitigation 8. Selected Sources 18 Location

Figure 1. Project Location. [Source: USGS 7.5’ Quadrangle, Ventura, CA, 1951 rev. 1967] 1. Administrative Setting The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires evaluation of project impacts on historic resources, including properties “listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Re- sources [or] included in a local register of historical resources.” A resource is eligible for listing on the Cali- fornia Register of Historical Resources if it meets any of the criteria for listing, which are:

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or repre- sents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c))

By definition, the California Register of Historical Resources also includes all “properties formally determined eligible for, or listed in, the National Register of Historic Places,” and certain specified State Historical Land- marks. The majority of “formal determinations” of NRHP eligibility occur when properties are evaluated by the State Office of Historic Preservation in connection with federal environmental review procedures (Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966). Formal determinations of eligibility also occur when prop- erties are nominated to the NRHP, but are not listed due to a lack of owner consent.

The criteria for determining eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) have been developed by the National Park Service. Eligible properties include districts, sites, buildings and structures,

A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguish- able entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

D. That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

According to the NRHP standards, in order for a property that is found to significant under one or more of the criteria to be considered eligible for listing, the “essential physical features” that define the property’s signifi- cance must be present. The standard for determining if a property’s essential physical features exist is known as integrity, which is defined as “the ability of a property to convey its significance.” The integrity evaluation is broken down into seven “aspects.”

The seven aspects of integrity are: Location (the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred); Design (the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property); Setting (the physical environment of a historic property); Materials (the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property); Workmanship (the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period of history or prehistory); Feeling (a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time), and; Association (the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property). Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

The relevant aspects of integrity depend upon the NRHP criteria applied to a property. For example, a property nominated under Criterion A (events), would be likely to convey its significance primarily through integrity of location, setting and association. A property nominated solely under Criterion C (design) would usually rely primarily upon integrity of design, materials and workmanship. The California Register regulations include similar language with regard to integrity, but also state that “it is possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register.” Further, according to the NRHP guidelines, the integrity of a property must be evaluated at the time the evaluation of eligibility is conducted. Integrity assessments cannot be based on speculation with respect to historic fabric and architectural elements that may exist but are not visible to the evaluator, or on restorations that are theoretically possible but that have not occurred. (CCR §4852 (c))

The minimum age criterion for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is 50 years. Properties less than 50 years old may be eligible for listing on the NRHP if they can be regarded as “exceptional,” as defined by the NRHP procedures, or in terms of the CRHR, “if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance” (Chapter 11, Title 14, §4842(d)(2))

Historic resources as defined by CEQA also includes properties listed in “local registers” of historic properties. A “local register of historic resources” is broadly defined in §5020.1 (k) of the Public Resources Code, as “a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution.” Local registers of historic properties come essentially in two forms: (1) surveys of historic resources conducted by a local agency in accordance with Office of Historic Preservation procedures and standards, adopted by the local agency and maintained as current, and (2) landmarks desig- nated under local ordinances or resolutions. These properties are “presumed to be historically or culturally significant... unless the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the resource is not historically or culturally significant.” (PRC §§ 5024.1, 21804.1, 15064.5)

City of San Buenaventura Municipal Code, Sec. 24.455.120 1. Historic district means a geographically definable area possessing a significant concentration, linkage or continuity of site, buildings, structures and/or objects united by past events, or aesthetically by plan or physical development, regardless of whether such a district may include some buildings, structures, sites, objects, or open spaces that do not contribute to the significance of the district.

A historic district can generally be distinguished from surrounding areas (1) by visual change such as building density, scale, type, age, or style; or (2) by historic documentation of different associations or patterns of development. The number of nonsignificant properties a historic district can contain yet still convey its sense of time and place and historical development depends on how these properties impact the historic district's integrity.

2. Landmark means any real property such as building, structure, or archaeological excavation, or object that is unique or significant because of its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or aesthetic feel- ing, and is associated with:

(a) Events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; (b) Lives of persons who made a meaningful contribution to national, state or local history;

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 2of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

(c) Reflecting or exemplifying a particular period of the national, state or local history; (d) Embodying the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; (e) The work of one or more master builders, designers, artists or architects whose talents influenced their historical period, or work that otherwise possesses high artistic value; (f) Representing a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (g) Yielding, or likely to yield, information important to national, state or local history or prehistory.

3. Point of interest means any real property or object: (a) That is the site of a building, structure or object that no longer exists but was associated with historic events, important persons, or embodied a distinctive character of architectural style; (b) That has historic significance, but was altered to the extent that the integrity of the original workmanship, materials or style is substantially compromised; (c) That is the site of a historic event which has no distinguishable characteristics other than that a historic event occurred there and the historic significance is sufficient to justify the establish- ment of a historic landmark. (Ord. No. 2005-004, § 3, 5-2-05)

2. Impact Thresholds and Mitigation According to the Public Resources Code, “a project that may cause a substantial change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” The Public Re- sources Code broadly defines a threshold for determining if the impacts of a project on an historic property will be significant and adverse. By definition, a substantial adverse change means, “demolition, destruction, relocation, or alterations,” such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired. For pur- poses of NRHP eligibility, reductions in a property’s integrity (the ability of the property to convey its signifi- cance) should be regarded as potentially adverse impacts. (PRC §21084.1, §5020.1(6))

Further, according to the CEQA Guidelines, “an historical resource is materially impaired when a project... [d]emolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the Cali- fornia Register of Historical Resources [or] that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical re- sources pursuant to section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historical re- sources survey meeting the requirements of section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant.”

The lead agency is responsible for the identification of “potentially feasible measures to mitigate significant adverse changes in the significance of an historical resource.” The specified methodology for determining if impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels are the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treat- ment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating His- toric Buildings (1995), publications of the National Park Service. (PRC §15064.5(b)(3-4))

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 3of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

3. Historical Setting General Historical Context The San Buenaventura Mission was founded in 1782 as the ninth and last mission established by Father Juni- pero Serra as part of Spain's colonization of Alta California. The mission was constructed a few hundred yards north of the Chumash village called Shisholop located near the Pacific Ocean and just east of the mouth of the Ventura River. The Spanish introduced their building techniques and engineering skills to the Chumash, who then built the adobe and rock church building and surrounding quadrangle.

With the declaration of Mexican independence from Spain in 1822, Alta California fell into the hands of a gov- ernment in disarray. The Spanish mission system was abandoned, following the Decrees of Secularization in 1833 and 1834, and the lands awarded in the form of large ranchos to the politically well-connected, or to soldiers and civil servants. Nineteen ranchos were awarded to citizens in what would later become Ventura County.

Rancho Ex-Mission, one of the 19 ranchos, was sold to Jose Arnaz, a merchant seaman, in 1846. He, in turn, sold it in 1850 to Don Manuel Rodriguez de Poli, a Spanish physician. Poli sold small lots west of the Mission to Californios who built adobe dwellings. In 1861 the Mission church and buildings were returned to the Catholic Church by President Abraham Lincoln.

In 1866 San Buenaventura was the first town, in what would later be Ventura County, to incorporate. The streets and blocks were laid out in a gridiron plan with the Mission at its center. In 1869 the official town map was adopted, bounded by the Ventura River on the west; Ash Street on the east; Poli Street on the north; and the Pacific Ocean on the South. In 1876 the Eastern Addition to the city was annexed and included the land east of Ash Street to the Sanjon Barranca.

The majority of the approximately 500 early residents of San Buenaventura were of Spanish, Mexican and Na- tive American origin. A small group of Americans and Europeans began to settle in the town in the 1850s and 1860s. A small Chinese settlement was located on Figueroa Street south of the Mission. In 1873 Ventura County was created out of the southeastern portion of Santa Barbara County.

Prior to the 1870s, the majority of adobe and wood frame buildings in the town were located west of the Mis- sion along Main Street, which was also known as the El Camino Real. As new immigrants arrived buildings were constructed to the east and south of the Mission, with Main Street developing as the commercial district. The first buildings were often wood frame and wood clad. By 1877 the first brick buildings began to appear, including the Peirano store across from the Mission.

The establishment of the Ventura Wharf in 1872 brought in many new residents and spurred economic growth by providing better shipping and storage facilities for merchants and a growing number of farmers. By 1874 the population in Ventura was about 1,000, and within two years, that figure almost doubled.

The decade of the 1880s has generally been referred to regionally as “the boom of the eighties,” a result pri- marily of the arrival of Southern Pacific Railroad, which was completed to Ventura in 1887. Agriculture con- tributed to this boom as farmers began to produce large amounts of barley, wheat, corn, honey and wool. The Theodosia Burr Shepherd Seed and Plant Company became nationally known. The town expanded its bounda- ries with 26 new plats laid out between 1886 and 1888. The population grew from 2,000 in 1880 to 3,869 by

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 4of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

1890. New buildings were constructed along Main Street primarily to the east, including two new hotels, the Rose and the Anacapa. Streets were graded, sidewalks laid, and a theater built.

In 1912 the Ventura County Courthouse was built on the hill above California Street, overlooking the town. The placement of this very public building at the east end of Main Street's commercial district, resulted in the migration of the commercial district away from the Mission, which had long been the center of town.

Following the “boom of the eighties,” growth remained steady until the 1920s when another boom was expe- rienced with the opening of the Ventura Avenue oil fields in 1922. During the 1920s, Ventura’s population jumped from 4,156 to 11,603, a 179 percent increase that exceeded Los Angeles’ population increase of 114 percent during the same timeframe. The Ventura Avenue oil field was the catalyst for this growth. The huge success of the oil industry in Ventura brought in thousands of oil workers, geologists, engineers and oil re- lated businesses. The demand for housing was great. The city’s eastern boundary extended from the Sanjon Barranca to Seaward Avenue and beyond with new subdivisions on the hillsides. In downtown, numerous new buildings were constructed, including the California Hotel on Main Street, the opulent new Ventura Theatre on Chestnut Street, the Elks Lodge on Ash and Main streets and the Masonic Lodge on California and Santa Clara streets. The popularity of the automobile and the good roads movement brought better highways. Highway 101 through Ventura County was developed during the 1920s, along what is now Thompson Boulevard. The creation of new subdivisions on the lands immediately to the east of the San Buenaventura Townsite, begin- ning during the 1920s, became the first major expansion of the city’s boundaries.

World War II saw another jump in population resulting, in part, from the development of the Navy bases at Point Mugu and Port Hueneme. During the Depression of the 1930s building construction had been nearly at a standstill until the end of World War II, when building materials were no longer scarce and building started anew. The late 1950s and early 1960s saw the construction of the Ventura 101 Freeway that greatly impacted the downtown area by dividing the beach area from the balance of the city. Many buildings were demolished for the freeway and for new parking lots in downtown. Also beginning during the post-war era, commercial strip development took root along Thompson Boulevard, forming a new commercial spine of an automobile- oriented character, which progressed steadily eastwards, along with the residential expansion of the city in this direction during the 1940s and 1950s.

The 1960s was the third major boom period for Ventura County, which became the fastest growing county in California. Many events significant to downtown occurred during the 1960s and 1970s. The County Courthouse moved to east Ventura, and the historic courthouse building converted to city hall. In addition, several key businesses left downtown to reopen in the new Buenaventura Mall in east Ventura. These changes led to a deterioration in the downtown, which the city sought to reverse with the formation of a redevelopment agency during the 1970s.

Site-Specific Context The E.P. Foster house was built on a portion of Rancho Ex-Mission lands located north of the San Buenaven- tura Mission, established in 1782, and extending along Sulphur Mountain roughly east to Santa Paula Creek and west to the Ventura River. In 1862 the “Valley of San Buenaventura” was subdivided by W.H. Leighton, land surveyor. In December 1879 Eugene P. Foster purchased nine acres of Lot 1 on Ventura Avenue from Ra- mon Lorenzana. At the time of purchase, Ventura Avenue was the main north-south route connecting Ventura to Ojai and Santa Barbara. In order to travel to Santa Barbara by horseback or stage, the route traveled north and then west through the Casitas Pass, avoiding the steep cliffs of the Rincon. The town of San Buenaven-

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 5of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

tura had been established around the mission in 1866. Following the subdivision of Rancho Ex-Mission lands, farms were established north of the town along Ventura Avenue, as well as east along Telegraph Road.

Farmers along the Avenue planted grain (wheat, barley, corn, alfalfa) and other crops that could be dry farmed. They also planted apricots, which became the most popular crop until World War I brought an end to the market. Apricots were among the first crops planted by E.P. Foster in 1881. The rural, relatively isolated and tranquil life of Avenue residents was quickly ended during the 1910s and 1920s with the development of oil in the Ventura River Valley and in the hills of Sulphur Mountain. The discovery of oil was followed by com- mercial and industrial development as well as new housing tracts. Many of the farmhouses and agricultural lands that once dotted the Avenue were quickly replaced. In more recent years, the last vestiges of the Ave- nue’s agriculture heritage were being replaced with new subdivisions.

Eugene Preston Foster Eugene Preston Foster (known throughout his life as “E.P.” Foster), was born in 1848 in Joliet, Illinois, the oldest of four children of Isaac Giles Foster and Roxana Cheney Foster. The Foster family came by covered wagon to California in 1854 and settled in northern California until moving to the Santa Barbara area in 1868. The Fosters purchased land in Goleta. Lucy Foster, sister of Eugene, married Joseph Sexton, who owned land adjacent to the Foster property. It was on this property that E. P. Foster developed his knowledge and life- long interest in horticulture by working in his brother-in-law’s nursery.

During the early 1870s E. P. Foster visited Ventura County, eventually purchasing 98 acres in La Colonia in 1874, and two, 640 and 160 acre parcels in the Conejo in 1876. On these lands he raised crops as well as sheep until the droughts of 1876 and 1877 decimated the sheep industry. Thousands of sheep and lambs died on the Conejo, the site of a vast grazing region. Foster lost most of his herd. (Assessment Roll books, 1880- 1884)

During this period E.P. Foster met Orpha Wood. She lived with her sister and brother-in-law, Phoebe and George Barron, on Ventura Avenue and taught part time at the Saticoy school. They married on August 6, 1874 and moved to property in the Conejo, living in what is believed to be the first frame house in what was then called the Triunfo Valley. The first two Foster children, Orpha and Grace, were born in the Conejo. Even- tually, ten children were born to the Fosters, with only the five girls growing to adulthood. They were Orpha “Pearl” Foster (1874); Grace Foster Percy (1875); Edith Foster Neel Mercer (1881); Ida Foster Baker (1885); Mildred Foster Ranger (1892). (Foster, 1919)

With the loss of their sheep herds the Fosters decided to move to Ventura, where E.P. Foster took a job as a ditch tender with the Santa Ana Water Company in May 1877. Foster was hired by W.S. Chaffee, trustee of the water company, who also provided the Fosters with a house on his Ventura Avenue property. Two years later, in December 1879, Foster acquired his own property on Ventura Avenue, where he built a house for his family around 1881.

Foster had a keen and very practical business sense. He rose to secretary-treasurer and eventually superinten- dent of the water company while also farming, raising apricots from seedlings. In 1881 he set out the first large apricot orchard of 150 acres on the J.A. Day ranch east of Ventura. He made an agreement with Day to care for the apricot trees for five years until they bore fruit, then to receive half of the orchard. He rented out the land between the rows to Chinese farmers, thus cultivating the orchard. At the end of five years, Foster traded the land for $10,000 in stock in the Bank of Ventura, organized by Thomas Bard and others in 1875. He

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 6of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

became bank cashier and eventually president in 1890, remaining with the bank until it was sold to the Bank of Italy in 1917. (Foster, 1919; Percy, ca. 1976: 4)

During his tenure as bank president, Foster was very active in promoting Ventura. He served on the Board of Trade in the early 1900s and helped to organize the Ventura Improvement Company in 1903 for the purpose of erecting a new post office. His business instincts directed him to invest in stocks, including the Union Oil Company and others. By 1905 he had resigned as manager of the water company, which by this time has been renamed the Ventura Light and Water Company. Foster also worked with G.W. Chrisman to establish the first electric light and ice plant in Ventura, and developed natural gas wells as part of his work with the water company. (Foster, 1919)

Foster also became engaged in volunteer work, particularly connected to his continued interest in horticul- ture, and the beautification of Ventura. Foster was apparently well-recognized for his knowledge of agricul- ture. The Fruit Growers Association in September 1882 urged the Ventura County Board of Supervisors to ap- point Foster to the Horticulture Commission, a position he received three months later. In 1885 he was ap- pointed “Quarantine Guardian” to combat fruit tree pests, probably plant lice.

Prior to 1900 Ventura County had no county parklands, and private lands were used for gatherings such as picnics. One such place was Camp Comfort adjacent to San Antonio Creek a few miles south of Ojai. Foster took an active interest in establishing parks in the county, and he spearheaded the movement to create the first park at Camp Comfort. Together with K.P. Grant he and others donated funds to the county to purchase the land for a park around 1904.

In 1906 the Fosters purchased 30 acres on the western side of the Ventura River in order to establish a park in memory of their son Eugene, who had died in 1903, and deeded it to the county as the Eugene Foster Memo- rial Park. In 1907 and 1908 the Fosters added approximately eight more acres to the park, some of it on the eastern side of the river (Percy, 1957: 4-5; Board of Supervisors’ Minute Books, Book 9: 352-53).

Foster was a great admirer of Golden Gate Park, created on sand dunes in San Francisco, and designed by Fos- ter’s friend John McLaren. Foster’s dream was to design a similar park along the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the river in Ventura. He and Orpha Foster purchased 65 acres at the mouth of the Ventura River, including a race- track, and donated it to the county in 1909 as Seaside Park. An additional 14 acres was purchased later by the Fosters and donated to the county. Foster supervised the planting of trees and shrubs on the property, assur- ing they could withstand the salt air and strong winds. Lawns were planted and picnic areas were established along with tennis courts and a smaller, one-half mile race track was laid out. Foster’s dream of recreating Golden Gate Park in Ventura was never realized, as the park was turned over to the State of California for a fairgrounds. Buildings replaced many of the trees and lawns.

In 1914 the Department of Forestry was created by the State of California to create and develop parks and to beautify the new highways then being constructed. Ventura County established its own forestry commission with a board member from each supervisorial district. Foster was chosen by the Board of Supervisors to head the commission, and R.G. Percy was appointed County Forester in charge of the work. (Percy, 1976: 8)

During 1910s and 1920s, Foster worked closely with Percy to develop new county parks along the beach on donated parcels, which became Faria, Hobson and Hoffman parks. Foster also suggested and supervised the planting of 1,000 palm trees along the new state highway from Ventura to Santa Barbara. The planting of

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 7of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

these trees inspired other plantings along county and state roads, where palms, pines, peppers and other trees beautified the countryside.

Improvements to Foster Park and Seaside Park were initiated and included the establishment of a nursery at Seaside Park for the propagation of trees. Also Foster initiated a beautification project at Foster Park by hav- ing a fountain constructed to take advantage of the natural Casitas Springs. Brush was cleared for campers and a dam was constructed for the creation of a “swimming hole” each summer. (Percy, 1976: 11)

Foster saw the need for parks in the eastern area of the county, so he and Percy made visits to these areas to find lands and donors. Robert Strathearn was asked to donate a portion of his large land holdings between Simi Valley and Moorpark, which became Oak Park. Foster, together with Supervisor Clark, helped persuade the Dennison family in the upper Ojai to donate 32 acres to the county, which became Dennison Park in 1924. Foster also persuaded Methuselam L. Steckel to donate funds to purchase land along Santa Paula Creek for a park. This property became Steckel Park in 1926. (Percy, 1957: 7-8)

In 1919 the Fosters purchased a lot near the corner of Main and Chestnut streets, part of the old Shepherd Gardens, and donated it to the city for a new library and city hall building. Their donation totaled $62,000, including land and construction costs. The building was completed in 1921.

To honor the Fosters for their many philanthropic efforts, the community established “Foster Day,” an elabo- rate celebration held on Labor Day, 1921 at Seaside Park. A lunch was held for the guests with a program at the new library. During the day many prominent individual throughout the county spoke of the Foster’s gener- osity, and a huge cake was presented by the Rotary Club and cut into 2,000 pieces, while the Santa Paula Band played and other musical groups performed. Among the dignitaries in attendance were Judge Merle Rogers, Mayor Dimmick, Judge Sheppard, Mrs. D. W. Mott, Charles Collins Teague, Judge Robert Clark, with an opening speech by Senator F.A. Arbuckle. Many of the speeches honoring the Fosters were printed in the local newspapers. Judge Robert M. Clarke stated that “the gifts which had been presented to this county, the two wonderful parks and the library building were of greater value than otherwise because the donors had put themselves into their gifts.” (Ventura Free Press, 9/6/21)

Following the donation of the library and city hall, the Fosters continued their philanthropic endeavors. They were instrumental in helping to raise money, along with the Big Sister’s League, for the new hospital in Ven- tura. When funds were still lacking, the Fosters made up the difference. The new hospital eventually was named the E.P. Foster Hospital, and later became Community Memorial Hospital.

E.P. Foster died at his Ventura Avenue home on February 12, 1932 at the age of 84. His obituary in the Ven- tura Free Press stated: “Mr. Foster’s greatest hobby throughout the years was tree-raising. In 1871 he planted the first eucalyptus tree in this county. Thomas Bard, another tree lover, and Mr. Foster, made many experi- ments with trees and flowers, the evidences of which can be seen in several parts of the county today.” The obituary summarized Foster’s many accomplishments, especially as chairman of the County Board of Forestry, the leader in establishing the county park system, as well as his gifts to the city and county of Foster and Seaside parks, the library and city hall, and hospital.

Orpha Woods Foster Born in Illinois in 1850, Orpha Woods came to California by train in December of 1872 with her sister Phebe, and settled in the Santa Barbara area, staying with another sister, Mrs. J.A. Blood. Phebe Foster married

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 8of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

George Barron in February of 1873 and moved to Ventura County. Orpha Woods moved into her sister and brother-in-law’s house on Ventura Avenue in the fall of 1873 and served as a substitute teacher for Phebe Woods Barron at the Saticoy School in 1874. At some point in her travels she met Eugene P. Foster, and the couple married in August of 1874, moving to the Conejo where E.P. Foster raised sheep. When in 1877 the Foster family moved to Ventura and settled on Ventura Avenue, Orpha Foster assisted her husband in his job with the Santa Ana Water Company by keeping the company records while raising their family.

Orpha Woods Foster was very active in a variety of service clubs throughout her lifetime. These included the Carpinteria Grange, the Eastern Star, Alice Bartlet Club, E.C.O. Club, and the Athene Club. She helped organize and became president of the Ventura County Association of Women’s Clubs. Eventually she was appointed to the executive board of the Los Angeles District Federation of Women’s Clubs. In that capacity, she was chosen in 1914 by Governor Hiram Johnson as one of five women to serve as trustees for the newly planned California Training School for Girls. This apparently was to be the first training school for girls in the United States to be managed entirely by women. Girls would be sent from juvenile courts throughout the state and would receive courses in domestic science and grammar school subjects. The school was established off Ventura Avenue, not far from the E.P. Foster property.

During the early 1900s, the various women’s groups undertook projects to beautify the community by promot- ing the Forestry Commission’s efforts, among others. One of the early historic preservation efforts in California was the El Camino Real Association, a statewide group formed in 1904 to recognize and rebuild the original El Camino Real, the colonial-era road connecting the missions throughout the state, and to preserve the mis- sions and other early adobe buildings. Bells were placed along the route as landmarks where missions were located. Orpha Foster was appointed a member of the Camino Real Committee by the Associated Women’s Clubs of Ventura County and also appointed treasurer of the Camino Real Association, the Ventura wing of the statewide organization. Orpha Foster’s activities in the community also included supporting her husband in his hospital fund raising efforts. She died at her home on August 17, 1938, six years after the death of E.P Foster.

Orpha Pearl Foster Orpha Pearl Foster, the eldest daughter of E.P. and Orpha Foster, remained at home to help care for younger siblings following her graduation from high school. When her sister Mildred died in 1930, she raised her two children. Upon her mother’s death in 1938, she inherited the Foster family residence on Ventura Avenue.

Orpha Foster continued her parent’s legacy of civic-mindedness, serving as president of the Community Memo- rial Hospital Board for more than 25 years. In addition, she helped found the Cancer Society’s Ventura chapter. She also became president of the Big Sisters’ League, a philanthropic organization whose original mission was to assist the children of prostitutes. The Ventura Rotary Club, of which E.P. Foster was a member, helped build a home for the children. In 1955 Orpha Pearl Foster donated the Foster residence and grounds to the Avenue School District. She died in 1973. (Ventura County Star Free Press, 5/16/1971)

4. Potential Historic Resources The E.P. Foster property is part of a 7.44 acre parcel that includes the adjacent Avenue School building. Origi- nally, the Foster property was 8.90 acres in area, and included land behind and to the west of the no longer extant Foster house, below a creek bank at the rear of the property. When the Foster property was donated to

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 9of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

the Avenue School District in 1955, the parcels were merged. At some point thereafter, the western portion of the property was sold, reducing the area to 7.44 acres.

The Foster house was lost to a fire in August 2010, due to vandalism. It was located at the end of a long tree- lined driveway in a park-like setting. In front of where the house once stood is a large expanse of lawn sur- rounded by mature trees on all sides. These trees include a Bunya-Bunya, Oak, Monterey Pine, Norfolk Island Pine (Star Pine), Deodar Cedar, several palms, several Pittosporum, several Eucalyptus and a Jacaranda. The majority of trees appear to date from the late 1800s or early 1900s and were almost certainly planted by E.P. Foster. Foster also built the small circular fountain embedded with stones located at the southeast corner of the former location of the house. [Photo 1]

Main Residence. Although the house is no longer extant, it will be described and photos included in this re- port to illustrate the previous site conditions. The large two-story residence was rectangular in plan with one story flat roofed wings on the north and south elevations. The front of the house had a medium hip roof with a gable roof at the rear. On the north and south elevations were intersecting gables with decorative barge- boards and octagonal shingles under the eaves. Three evenly spaced gable roofed dormers were located over the three second floor windows on the front of the house. A brick chimney punctuated the roofline with a second brick exterior chimney on the north elevation. [Photo 2]

The recessed front entrance was located on the left side with engaged pilasters supporting an entablature. The paneled front door was flanked by multi-paned sidelights. The front windows were multi-paned metal case- ments with wood mouldings. The north elevation featured the large exterior masonry fireplace, constructed during the 1930s. The one story flat roofed addition featured a balustrade on top with a geometric design. First floor windows were all French doors with wood mouldings. Decorative shingles were found under the main gable. The double gable ends contained decorative bargeboards. [Photo 3]

The south elevation featured a slanted bay window that had been partially obscured by the one story flat roofed addition. Windows on the south side of the house were primarily double hung wood sash with wood mouldings. The upper portion of the window was multi-paned. The second floor featured a three part window with a large fixed window in the center flanked by two smaller windows on each side. The one story wing on the south side had an enclosed porch whose stairway featured a wood balustrade with a geometric design. There were three pairs of French doors. A flat roof extended out over the porch entry and was supported by two square posts. The enclosed porch, stairway and balustrade were a later addition, probably after 1955. [Photo 4]

The rear portion of the house featured a small shed roof addition adjacent to the back stairway. The back porch was enclosed with windows along the upper half. The second floor may also have been an open porch and enclosed in later years, perhaps in the late 1930s. Windows were multi-paned with wood mouldings. The house was covered with wide horizontal wood siding and rested on a stone and concrete pier foundation.

The interior of the house exhibited several notable architectural features. In the original living room was the carved wood fireplace mantle as well as remnants of lincrusta wall covering on the east and west facing walls. The original wood door mouldings were intact in this room. The coved ceiling in this and other rooms had been altered with the addition of sprayed “cottage cheese.” In the main living room was another brick fire- place with a wood mantle from the 1930s period.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 10of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

Dates of Construction/Alterations No building permits for any buildings on the property exist, except for the portable trailers that were moved onto the property in 1984, thus make it difficult to determine factual dates of construction. The most helpful records that do exist to aid in determining possible dates are the Assessment Roll books and the newspapers. Of the former, only the 1873 to 1884 roll books exist. They indicate that the nine acre property was purchased in 1879 by E.P. Foster and the first improvement of $250.00 was recorded in 1881, indicating that a building, probably a small residence, was built at that time.

Approximate dates of construction and major alterations can be surmised by examining the building’s archi- tecture, the limited historical record, and circumstantial evidence. Based on the assessment roll books, it ap- pears that the original Foster house had been a much smaller building constructed circa 1881, which may pos- sibly have been the existing one-story residence located elsewhere on the property (see description below). The main residence was probably built during the late 1880s, or possibly enlarged from the 1881 improve- ment. The architectural evidence for this time period could be seen on the north and south elevations, which are characterized by elements of the Stick-Eastlake mode of the Victorian style, including the slanted bay win- dow, decorative bargeboard and the shingles under the gable end. On the interior, the elaborate wooden fire- place mantle and lincrusta wall covering also appear to date stylistically from this period. This time period also coincides with an improvement in the Foster’s financial condition. In 1886, E.P. Foster received the $10,000.00 proceeds of his investment of labor and materials in the J.A. Day property, providing the family with the means to construct a larger home to accommodate their growing family.

The Ventura Free Press for July 12, 1901, listed an improvement for E.P. Foster’s residence of $1,800.00, built by “Shaw.” This was probably local builder Selwyn Shaw, who designed and built many residences in Ventura during this time period. The $1,800.00 improvement suggests a substantial enlargement to the residence at that time, probably including a front-facing, second story intersecting gable addition to what may have been originally a one or one-and-a-half story residence. One-story wings were added on the south and north sides, probably during the 1910s or 1920s. [Historic Photo 1]

Sometime during the late 1930s, perhaps after the house was inherited by Orpha Pearl Foster in 1938, a large two-story addition was attached to the front of the house, removing the porch and intersecting front gable. This addition contained the living room on the first floor and a second floor bedroom and bathroom. Other minor changes on the exterior include the enclosure of the porch on the one story south wing, and appeared to incorporate a portion of an 1880s balustrade relocated from another part of the house. [Historic Photo 2]

One-story residence. This extant building is located near edge of the bank. When photographed in 2003, this one story residence exhibited a modified L-plan with a low pitched side gable roof with intersecting gable on the south side. A shed roof addition was located on the south side. The porch was recessed with a shed roof covering supported by square wood posts. Windows were altered and partially boarded over. Siding is board- and- batten and single wall construction. [Photo 5]

Recent photographs show more extensive alterations with the removal of the front porch and the removal of walls and windows from the front elevation. [Photo 6]

This building’s date of construction is uncertain. Conceivably this building may have been constructed circa 1881 as the Foster’s original residence on the property, or perhaps somewhat later as a secondary dwelling.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 11of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

According to Foster descendants, it may have served as the gardener’s residence or as a guesthouse. The house is in a deteriorated condition.

Garage/residence. This extant two-story building is located adjacent to the smaller residence with the rear portion of the building cantilevered over the bank and supported by piers and posts. It is rectangular in plan with a medium pitched gable roof, covered with seamed metal and exposed rafters and knee brackets under the eaves. The first floor consists of several sliding garage doors along the front of the building with a regular entrance door at the north end. A one story shed roof addition with seamed metal roof is located at the north end of the building. It is located near the edge of a bank and extends out over the bank supported by wood posts from below. A wooden stairway is located at the south end leading to the second floor. A small wooden balcony with wood slat railing is located in the center of the east elevation on the second story. A section of the railing has been removed. Windows are wood sash with wood mouldings. The building is covered with me- dium horizontal clapboard siding and plywood. Changes to the building include the removal of walls, doors and windows on the first floor eastern elevation and the removal of a portion of the balcony. The building is in very poor condition, with extensive vandalism damage to the interior of the second floor. This building exhibits California Bungalow characteristics, including exposed rafters and knee brackets under the eaves, suggesting a circa 1910-15 date of construction. [Photo 7]

Portable classrooms. Two portable classrooms were moved onto the original Foster property in 1984 for use by the Head Start program. They are located on the south side of the driveway in front of the main residence and are partially screened by shrubs.

Potentially Historic Properties in the Vicinity Other properties in the immediate vicinity have been determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP and as City Landmarks in the Ventura County Cultural Heritage Survey, Phase I - San Buenaventura, 1983. The Ventura Avenue School at 2647 N. Ventura Avenue has been identified as being individually eligible for the NRHP. This property is currently on the same 7.44 acre parcel as the E.P. Foster home. After the Foster property was do- nated to the Avenue School District in 1955 the two parcels were merged. For purposes of this investigation, the E.P. Foster property is evaluated separately from the Avenue School because the Foster property’s signifi- cance is derived from the period beginning with its purchase by E.P. Foster in 1879, and ending in 1932 with his death.

The Avenue School was determined individually eligible for listing on the NRHP in the Ventura County Cultural Heritage Survey, Phase I - San Buenaventura, 1983. A more recent survey, The Westside Historic Context and Survey Report conducted in 2011 by Galvin Preservation Associates concurred with the eligibility findings for the school. Also determined eligible for Ventura landmark designation is the property at 2686 N. Ventura Ave- nue, the Willett Ranch in a Phase II Historic Resources Report conducted by San Buenaventura Research Asso- ciates in 2010.

5. Eligibility of Historic Resources National and California Registers: Significance, Eligibility and Integrity The Foster property does not appear to be eligible for the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion A and Criterion 1 (significant historical events). While the site is generally associated with the development of agriculture on Ventura Avenue, the available evidence does not suggest that it played any notable role in that development.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 12of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

The property does appear to be potentially eligible under Criterion B and Criterion 2 (lives of persons signifi- cant in our past) for its association with E.P. Foster and Orpha Woods Foster and to a lesser degree, their daughter Orpha Pearl Foster. The Fosters were important locally throughout Ventura County as community leaders and notable philanthropists. They were responsible for the construction and development of major buildings, parks and institutions in the community. E.P. and Orpha Foster purchased the first 32 acres that became E.P. Foster Park and purchased 65 acres of land that became Seaside Park, donating them to the County of Ventura. The Fosters purchased the land and donated funds to construct the Ventura Library/City Hall building in 1921, and were the major donors to, and forces behind, the construction of the Ventura Hos- pital, later renamed in honor E.P. Foster. This institution remains in operation today as Community Memorial Hospital.

E.P. Foster was most recognized as the leader in establishing a system of parks in Ventura County. In 1904 he, along with a few others, donated funds to purchase the first county park at Camp Comfort. He then donated acreage to establish Foster Park (1906) and Seaside Park (1908), working closely with the county to assure that these parks were appropriately landscaped. In 1914 he was appointed by the Board of Supervisors to head the newly established Forestry Board. In this capacity he developed a tree planting program along the major roads throughout the county. During his tenure, he worked ceaselessly to identify potential park sites throughout the entire county, resulting in the development of Steckel Park near Santa Paula, Oak Park in Moorpark; Dennison Park in Upper Ojai and three small beach parks along the Rincon, donated by the Faria and Hobson families.

Orpha Woods Foster was important for her leadership role in the women’s club movement in Ventura County during the early 1900s. She helped establish and became president of the Ventura County Association of Women’s Clubs and went on to be appointed to the executive board of the Los Angeles District Federation of Women’s Clubs. In that capacity, she was chosen by then Governor Hiram Johnson as one of five women to serve as a trustee for the newly planned California Training School for Girls. This apparently was to be the first training school for girls in the United States to be managed entirely by women.

Orpha Foster was an active member in many of the Ventura service groups who undertook projects to beautify the community by promoting the Forestry Commission’s efforts as well as the Camino Real Association move- ment. She worked tirelessly towards the construction of a club house for use by all the women’s clubs in Ven- tura. The Athene Clubhouse was built in 1910 in downtown Ventura and provided a place for meetings in the auditorium, a library and a restroom, as well as a kitchen and bedroom for visiting women. The local newspa- per hailed the building, writing, “the first nail in progressive Ventura has been hit on the head by the women of the city ... it means that the women will in future take a livelier interest than ever in civic affairs and movements for town betterment.” Orpha Foster was elected to the board of directors and also served as presi- dent. Orpha Foster was also appointed a member of the Camino Real Committee by the Associated Women’s Clubs of Ventura County and as appointed treasurer of the Camino Real Association, the Ventura wing of the statewide organization.

In 1921 Foster Day was declared in Ventura County in recognition of the family who had given so much to the community. Among the county’s many community-minded benefactors, few if any equal the depth and scale of giving exhibited by the Fosters.

The Foster’s daughter, Orpha Pearl, continued the philanthropic legacy of her parents and became president of the Community Memorial Hospital Board for more than 25 years. In addition, she helped found the Cancer

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 13of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

Society’s Ventura chapter. She also became president of the Big Sisters’ League, a philanthropic organization whose original mission was to provide homes for the children of prostitutes. The Ventura Rotary Club, of which E.P. Foster was a member, helped build the facility.

The property does not appear to be potentially eligible under Criterion C and Criterion 3 (design and construc- tion) as a consequence of the loss of the main residence. The design of two remaining buildings has also been compromised by extensive alterations, and consequently are not representative of an architectural style, or type or method of construction. The landscaping around the house is intact from the late nineteenth through early twentieth century. Many fine specimen trees planted by E.P. Foster remain, including palms, Bunya Bunya, Star Pine, Monterey Pine, oak, Deodar Cedar and Eucalyptus.

Integrity Discussion

The integrity of location for this property is only partially intact because the main residence is no longer ex- tant. The remaining buildings are in their original location. The integrity of design for the property is sub- stantially compromised due to the loss of the main residence. The garage/residence has lost some of its de- sign integrity as a result of alterations to doors and siding, as well as additions. The small residence has lost essentially all of its design integrity with the removal of the porch, walls and windows. The only intact design feature appears to be the landscape.

The setting for the property is substantially compromised due to the loss of the main residence. Although the rural agricultural setting has been largely diminished, this setting began to be replaced by mixed industrial uses by the 1920s. The property retains its setting relationship to the Avenue School, built in the 1920s im- mediately to the south of the property, and a residence from the early 1900s abuts on an adjacent property to the north. New housing development has occurred a short distance from the property to the south, an increas- ing trend on Ventura Avenue over the past 20 years.

To the extent that the property is altered, it integrity of materials and workmanship are also reduced. Integ- rity of feeling and association has also been reduced with the loss of the main residence that was so closely associated with E.P. Foster and his family as their home.

In conclusion, the integrity of the E.P. Foster property is not strong enough for eligibility to the National Reg- ister. Although the landscape features are intact, the loss of the main house reduces the integrity to the level of insignificant.

Local Significance and Eligibility As discussed above, the subject property does not appear to be associated with significant (a) events, or (c) to reflect or exemplify a particular period of history. It does appear to be associated with (b) the lives of sig- nificant persons. It does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construc- tion, or (e) represent the work of a master builder, designer, artist or architect, especially due to the loss of the main residence. This property does not (f) appear to represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (i.e., have the potential to contribute to a historic dis- trict).

The E.P. Foster property appears to be eligible as a local landmark under Criterion (b) for its association with E.P. Foster. In addition to being significant under one of the designation criteria, the City of Ventura ordi- nance requires that a property also be “significant because of its location, design, setting, materials, work-

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 14of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

manship or aesthetic feeling.” Because of the loss of the main residence and the lack of integrity of the ex- tant buildings, the property today is significant only for its remaining landscape features. The numerous specimen trees planted on the property by E.P. Foster represent his interest in horticulture and are directly related to his contributions in this field. The loss of the house and the alterations to the remaining outbuild- ings reduce the setting and result in a loss of design, materials and workmanship. However the remaining landscape features, including the long tree-lined driveway, specimen trees, fountain and lawn, are in their original locations and retain integrity of design, setting and materials.

Upon Foster’s death in 1932, the Ventura Free Press stated: “Mr. Foster’s greatest hobby throughout the years was tree-raising. In 1871 he planted the first eucalyptus tree in this county. Thomas Bard, another tree lover, and Mr. Foster, made many experiments with trees and flowers, the evidences of which can be seen in several parts of the county today.” The obituary summarized Foster’s many accomplishments, especially as chairman of the County Board of Forestry, the leader in establishing the county park system, as well as his gifts to the city and county of Foster and Seaside parks, the library and city hall, and hospital.

Very few examples of Foster’s tree plantings remain today. The palms along the roadways are gone, as are the Seaside Park plantings. In addition, his library and hospital contributions have been compromised. The E.P Foster Library was completely altered from its original design and the plantings removed. The hospital was heavily altered and enveloped with new construction. Foster Park, outside Ventura, is the only fairly unaltered site remaining that had been donated by the Foster family. Consequently, the E.P. Foster property and land- scape features appear to be the best extant example of Foster’s interest in and promotion of horticulture within the City of Ventura.

Conclusion The E.P. Foster property does not appear to be eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR, but does appear eligi- ble for designation as a City Landmark. The property is significant for its landscape features but not for the two remaining outbuildings.

6. Project Impacts The demolition of the two outbuildings will not constitute an adverse project impact, as both buildings were found to be ineligible due to extensive alterations. However, the property in general has been subject to a lengthy period of vandalism and decline, which resulted in the loss of the E.P. Foster residence to fire and the outbuildings falling into their present state of deterioration. While the significant landscape features (speci- men trees, tree-lined driveway, fountain and lawn) will not be altered as a result of the proposed project, the project does not include any plan for the continued maintenance of these features that would serve to arrest further decline. If these features were lost, the property would likely become ineligible as a City Landmark. Consequently, it is reasonable to foresee a cumulative, longterm adverse impact on the property resulting from a continued lack of adequate maintenance.

7. Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts A principle of environmental impact mitigation is that some measure or combination of measures may, if in- corporated into a project, serve to avoid or reduce significant and adverse impacts to a historic resource. In reference to mitigating impacts on historic resources, the CEQA Guidelines state:

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 15of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or recon- struction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project's impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant. (PRC §15126.4 (b)(1))

These standards, developed by the National Park Service, represent design guidelines for carrying out historic preservation, restoration and rehabilitation projects. The Secretary’s Standards and the supporting literature describe historic preservation principles and techniques, and offers recommended means for carrying them out. Adhering to the Standards is the only method described within CEQA which provides the presumption of impact mitigation of project impacts on historic resources to less than significant and adverse levels.

The demolition (i.e., the complete loss) of an historic property cannot be seen as conforming with the Secre- tary of the Interior’s Standards. Therefore, the absolute loss of an historic property should generally be re- garded as an adverse environmental impact which cannot be mitigated to a less than significant and adverse level. Further, the usefulness of documentation of an historic resource, through photographs and measured drawings, as mitigation for its demolition, is limited by the CEQA Guidelines, which state:

In some circumstances, documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur. (CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (b)(2))

Implied by this language is the existence of circumstances whereby documentation may mitigate the impact of demolition (i.e., the complete loss) to a less than significant level. However, the conditions under which this might be said to have occurred are not described in the Guidelines. It is also noteworthy that the existing CEQA case law does not appear to support the concept that the complete loss of an historic resource can be mitigated to less than adverse impact levels by means of documentation or commemoration. (League for Pro- tection of Oakland’s Architectural and Historic Resources v. City of Oakland [1997] 52 Cal. App. 4th 896; Archi- tectural Heritage Association v. County of Monterey [2004] 19 Cal. Rptr. 3d 469)

Taken in their totality, the CEQA Guidelines require a project which will have potentially adverse impacts on historic resources to conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, in order for the impacts to be pre- sumptively mitigated to below significant and adverse levels. However, CEQA also mandates the adoption of feasible mitigation measures which will reduce adverse impacts, even if the residual impacts after mitigation remain significant. Means other than the application of the Standards would necessarily be required to achieve this level of mitigation. In determining what type of additional mitigation measures would reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible, best professional practice dictates considering the level of eligibility of the property, as well as by what means it derives its significance.

Mitigation programs for impacts on historic resources tend to fall into three broad categories: documentation, design and interpretation. Documentation techniques involve the recordation of the site according to ac- cepted professional standards, such that the data will be available to future researchers, or for future restora- tion efforts. Design measures could potentially include direct or indirect architectural references to a lost his- toric property, e.g., the incorporation of historic artifacts, into the new development, or the relocation of the

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 16of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

historic property to another suitable site. Interpretative measures could include commemorating a significant historic event or the property’s connection to historically significant themes.

Project Mitigation An Identification and Maintenance report shall be prepared for the property. The report shall document the species, condition, location and approximate ages of the significant landscape features on the property. Sig- nificance for the historic landscape features shall be determined based on a historically appropriate period of significance for the property. The maintenance component of the plan shall include means for addressing im- mediate and long-term landscape maintenance issues for the landscape features. The report shall be prepared by a qualified historic preservation professional in conjunction with a qualified arborist or landscape archi- tect. The report shall include a scaled plan illustrating the location of the plantings and features. The Identi- fication and Maintenance Plan shall be completed within one year after the demolition of the buildings pro- posed to be removed.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 17of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

8. Selected Sources California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #6. “California Register and National Register: A Comparison (for purposes of determining eligibility for the California Register.”

Coombe, David B. “Public Library Service in Ventura. A Brief History.” Ventura County Historical Society Quar- terly. 2 (Winter 1983) 20-22.

Fairbanks, F.L. “Early Day Banks and Banking in Ventura County.” Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly. 3(May 1967) 3, 10 & 20.

Fillmore Herald. “What Foster Day, September 5, Should Mean to Ventura County, 9/19/21.

Foster, Mrs. E. P. Unpublished manuscript prepared for Ventura E.C.O. Club for their meeting on March 17, 1919, located in Foster Files, Ventura County Museum of History and Art Library.

Gidney, C.M., Brooks, Benjamin and Sheridan, E.M. History of Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties. 2 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company, 1917.

Outland, Charles. Newspaper Index 1873 - 1915, numerous listings for E.P. and Orpha Foster; women’s club- house; El Camino Real Bells, etc. beginning 1881 through 1915.

Oxnard Courier. “Foster Day will be Great Pioneer Day.” 8/27/21.

Percy, Eugene Foster. “Traffic on Ventura Avenue: Horses and Buggies to Rollerskates.” Ventura County Histori- cal Society Quarterly. 2 (Winter 1978) 1-16.

Percy, Eugene Foster. “All Swimmers Welcome to the Reservoir.” Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly. 2 (Winter 1978) 17-24.

Percy, R.G. “E.P. Foster & the Foster Family.” unpublished manuscript in Foster Files, Ventura County Museum of History and Art Library, ca. 1976

Percy, R.G. “ The Fosters.” Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly. 3 (May 1957) 2-9.

Percy, R.G. “Wet and Dry Years.” Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly. 4 (Summer 1971) 13-29.

Sexton, Lucy Foster. The Foster Family: California Pioneers. Santa Barbara: The Schauer Printing Studio, Inc. 1925.

Sheridan, Sol. History of Ventura County, California. Vol. II. Chicago: S.J. Clarke, 1926.

Ventura City building permit files, temporary trailers, 1984.

Ventura County Assessment Role books, 1880-1884, located in Ventura County Museum of History and Art Li- brary.

Ventura County Board of Supervisor’s Minutes, 1873-1920, located at Ventura County Government Center, Clerk of the Board office.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 18of 19 Historic Resources Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura

Ventura County Building permit files, no permits found

Ventura County Deed books, Grantee book 8, p. 239 (Ramon Lorenzana to E.P. Foster, 9 acres, 12/23/1879); Grantee book 1, p. 628 (T. Bard to E.P. Foster, 100 acres, 2/9/1874); Grantee Book 4, p. 309 (John Edwards to E.P. Foster, 807 acres, 9/15/1876); Grantee Book 14, p. 144 (James Day to E.P. Foster, 75 acres, 2/16/1884); Book 1292, p. 498 (Orpha W. Foster to Avenue School, 5/23/55).

Ventura County Death Index, E.P. Foster, Orpha Woods Foster, Orpha Pearl Foster.

Ventura County Free Press, “Mrs. Orpha Foster, Pioneer, Passes” 9/17/38, page 1; “E. P. Foster passes away at his Home”, 2/12/32, p. 1.; “Camino Real Organized Here” 7/22/04; “Clubhouse Discussion and offers” 3/21/ 02; “Splendid Club House is Scene of Fine Reception” 9/23/10; “The list of improvements with estimated cost... E.P. Foster, Residence- Shaw, $1800.” 7/12/01; “First School in America Managed Wholly by Women” 1/ 16/14, p. 1; “Whole County Acknowledges Gratitude to Benefactors” 9/6/21; “Thousands from all Parts of County Gather to Pay Splendid Tribute to Mr. & Mrs. Foster.” 9/9/21.

Ventura County Power Company. “Book of Ventura Avenue Showing Location of Ditches, Flumes, pipelines, Reservoirs and other Property of the Ventura County Power Company, March 1910.” Located in Engineering Department, Ventura City Hall.

Ventura County Star-Free Press, “The E.P. Foster Family: The Living and the Legacy.” 5/16/1971.

Ventura City Directories, 1898 - 1940.

National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division, nd.

SAN BUENAVENTURA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Page 19of 19 Photo 1. E.P. Foster grounds and drive leading to house (no longer extant), facing west. [2/4/2003]

Photo 2. Foster residence and fountain, southeast elevation, facing west. [2/4/2003] Photo 3. Foster residence, north elevation, facing south. [2/4/2003]

Photo 4. Foster residence, addition on south side, facing northwest. [2/4/2003] Photo 5. Employee residence, east elevation, facing west. [2/4/2003]

Photo 6. Employee residence, same building as above showing removal of porch and front walls. [9/24/ 2012] Photo 7. Garage/residence, east elevation, facing west. [9/24/2012]

Historic Photo 1. Foster residence, southern and eastern elevations. [circa 1915] Historic Photo 2. Foster residence, eastern elevation. [circa 1937]

Appendix C Archaeological Survey Report

Archaeological Survey Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue Ventura, California U.S.G.S. Ventura, CA quadrangle

Prepared for: Ventura Unified School District 255 West Stanley Avenue #100 Ventura, CA 93001

Prepared by: Rincon Consultants 180 North Ashwood Avenue Ventura, California 93003

Authors: Hannah Haas, B.A., Kevin Hunt, B.A., and Robert Ramirez, M.A., RPA

November 13, 2012

Keywords: Ventura, CA quadrangle; E.P. Foster; house; P-56-150491

H. Haas, K. Hunt, and R. Ramirez 2012 Archaeological Survey Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. Rincon Consultants Report No. 12-00210. Report on file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, Fullerton, California.

2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Archaeological Survey Report 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California

Table of Contents

Page Table of Contents ...... i Executive Summary ...... 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources ...... 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ...... 1 1.0 Introduction ...... 2 1.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 2 1.2 Project area ...... 2 1.3 Personnel ...... 3 2.0 Environmental Setting ...... 3 3.0 Cultural Setting ...... 3 3.1 Prehistoric Overview ...... 3 3.1.1 Early Man Horizon (ca. 10,000 – 6000 B.C.) ...... 4 3.1.2 Milling Stone Horizon (6000–3000 B.C.) ...... 4 3.1.3 Intermediate Horizon (3000 B.C. – A.D. 500) ...... 4 3.1.4 Late Prehistoric Horizon (A.D. 500–Historic Contact)...... 5 3.2 Ethnographic Overview ...... 5 3.3 Historic Overview ...... 6 3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769–1822) ...... 6 3.3.2 Mexican Period (1822–1848) ...... 6 3.3.3 American Period (1848–Present) ...... 7 4.0 Background Research ...... 8 4.1 California Historical Resources Information System ...... 8 4.1.1 P-56-001109 (Historic Railroad Berm) ...... 10 4.1.2 P-56-001547 (Multi-component Artifact Deposit) ...... 10 4.1.3 P-56-001600 (Historic Artifact Scatter) ...... 10 4.2 Native American Heritage Commission ...... 12

Ventura Unified School District i 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

5.0 Fieldwork ...... 13 5.1 Field Survey ...... 13 6.0 Findings ...... 14 6.1 E.P. Foster Residence (P-56-150491) ...... 14 7.0 Recommendations ...... 15 7.1 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources ...... 15 7.2 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ...... 15 8.0 References ...... 16

Tables Table 1 Previously Conducted Studies Within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area ...... 9 Table 2 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area ... 11

Photographs

Photograph 1 E.P. Foster Residence outbuildings ...... 13 Photograph 2 View of Survey Area facing north ...... 14

Appendices Appendix A Figure 1 Appendix B Records Search Summary Appendix C Native American Correspondence

Ventura Unified School District ii 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Rincon Consultants (Rincon) was retained by the Ventura Unified School District to conduct an archaeological resources study for the E.P. Foster Outbuildings Demolition Project. The study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The study included a records search, Native American scoping, and intensive pedestrian survey.

The 7.44-acre site is owned by the Ventura Unified School District (District). It houses the closed Avenue School and was also the site of the former E.P. Foster residence and outbuildings. These structures are a locally listed resource recorded by the California Office of Historic Preservation as P-56-150491. However, the primary residence was destroyed in a fire in 2010. The District now proposes to demolish the two outbuildings, as they are in serious disrepair, are unsafe, and have become an attractive nuisance.

No prehistoric or Native American cultural resources were identified within the project area. The nearest recorded Native American resource is approximately 0.3 mile from the site.

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES

If cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (National Park Service [NPS] 1983) must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under NHPA, additional work such as data recovery excavation may be warranted.

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS

The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the Ventura County Coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Ventura Unified School District 1 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Rincon Consultants (Rincon) was retained by the Ventura Unified School District to conduct an archaeological resources study for the E.P. Foster Outbuildings Demolition Project (project). The project currently proposes the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the E.P. Foster Residence, a historic locally listed building that was destroyed by fire in 2010. The residence consisted of a main house and several outbuildings. The main house was a two-story Colonial Revival style home built in 1881which was occupied by Eugene P. Foster until his death in 1932. The two outbuildings slated for demolition consist of a one-story building thought to have either been an employee residence or a guest house and an adjacent two-story building thought to have served as a carriage house/garage with guest quarters above. The 7.44-acre project parcel also contains the Avenue School, not currently in use, which has been deemed individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 1983. This study has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements.

1.1 REGULATORY SETTING

CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Section 21084.1). If it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]). Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR; Section 21084.1), a resource included in a local register of historical resources (Section 15064.5[a][2]), or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (Section 15064.5[a][3]).

1.2 PROJECT AREA

The project area comprises a 7.44-acre parcel of land located at 2717 North Ventura Avenue in Ventura, California. The project area contains the Avenue School building, remnants of the E.P. Foster residence, and two portable classrooms currently used by the Head Start Program.

Ventura Unified School District 2 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

1.3 PERSONNEL

Rincon Archaeologist Hannah Haas, B.A., conducted the field survey and is the primary author of this report. Rincon Cultural Resources Program Manager Kevin Hunt, B.A., managed the archaeological resources study, requested the records search from the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), conducted the Native American scoping, and coauthored this report. Rincon Cultural Resources Principal Investigator Robert Ramirez, M.A., Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA), served as principal investigator and coauthored this report. Mr. Ramirez meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology (NPS 1983).

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The project area is situated at an elevation of approximately 35 meters (116 feet) above mean sea level (AMSL). In addition to the two outbuildings associated with the Foster Residence, two portable classrooms used by the Head Start Program are present on the property. These classrooms were placed there in 1984. The Avenue School is also located on the property, though it is no longer in use. There are several different types of trees on the property, including Eucalyptus and Oak, which were planted by E.P. Foster himself. Other vegetation includes grasses. There is evidence of rodent burrowing on the north side of the property. The property is roughly 1.5 km (1 mile) from the Ventura River and roughly 5 km (3 miles) from the Pacific Ocean.

3.0 CULTURAL SETTING

3.1 PREHISTORIC OVERVIEW

During the twentieth century, many archaeologists developed chronological sequences to explain prehistoric cultural changes within all or portions of southern California (c.f., Jones and Klar 2007; Moratto 1984). Wallace (1955, 1978) devised a prehistoric chronology for the southern California coastal region that included four horizons: Early Man, Milling Stone, Intermediate, and Late Prehistoric. Wallace’s chronology was based on early studies and lacked the chronological precision of absolute dates (Moratto 1984:159). Since then, Wallace’s (1955) synthesis has been modified and improved using thousands of radiocarbon dates obtained by southern California researchers over recent decades (Byrd and Raab 2007:217; Koerper and Drover 1983; Koerper et al. 2002; Mason and Peterson 1994). The prehistoric chronological sequence for southern California presented below is a composite based on Wallace (1955) and Warren (1968) as well as later studies, including Koerper and Drover (1983). The project area lies in what is described as the Santa Barbara Subregion of the Southern Coast (Archaeological) Region, one of eighteen organizational subdivisions of the state (Moratto 1984:Fig. 1).

Ventura Unified School District 3 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

3.1.1 Early Man Horizon (ca. 10,000 – 6000 B.C.)

Numerous pre-8000 B.C. sites have been identified along the mainland coast and Channel Islands of southern California (c.f., Erlandson 1991; Johnson et al. 2002; Jones and Klar 2007; Moratto 1984; Rick et al. 2001:609). One of them, the Arlington Springs site on Santa Rosa Island produced human femurs dating to approximately 13,000 years ago (Arnold et al. 2004; Johnson et al. 2002). On nearby San Miguel Island, human occupation at Daisy Cave (SMI-261) has been dated to nearly 13,000 years ago. This site also included some of the earliest examples of basketry on the Pacific Coast, dating to over 12,000 years old (Arnold et al. 2004).

Although few Clovis or Folsom style fluted points have been found in southern California (e.g., Dillon 2002; Erlandson et al. 1987), Early Man Horizon sites are generally associated with a greater emphasis on hunting than later horizons. Recent data indicate that the Early Man economy was a diverse mixture of hunting and gathering, including a significant focus on aquatic resources in coastal areas (e.g., Jones et al. 2002) and on inland Pleistocene lakeshores (Moratto 1984). A warm and dry 3,000-year period called the Altithermal began around 6000 B.C. The conditions of the Altithermal are likely responsible for the change in human subsistence patterns at this time, including a greater emphasis on plant foods and small game.

3.1.2 Milling Stone Horizon (6000–3000 B.C.)

Wallace (1955:219) defined the Milling Stone Horizon as “marked by extensive use of milling stones and mullers, a general lack of well[-]made projectile points, and burials with rock cairns.” The dominance of such artifact types indicate a subsistence strategy oriented around collecting plant foods and small animals. A broad spectrum of food resources were consumed including small and large terrestrial mammals, sea mammals, birds, shellfish and other littoral and estuarine species, near-shore fishes, yucca, agave, and seeds and other plant products (Kowta 1969; Reinman 1964). Variability in artifact collections over time and from the coast to inland sites indicates that Milling Stone Horizon subsistence strategies adapted to environmental conditions (Byrd and Raab 2007:220). The Topanga Canyon site in the Santa Monica Mountains is considered one of the definitive Milling Stone Horizon sites in southern California.

Lithic artifacts associated with Milling Stone Horizon sites are dominated by locally available tool stone and in addition to ground stone tools such as manos and metates, chopping, scraping, and cutting tools are very common. Kowta (1969) attributes the presence of numerous scraper-plane tools in Milling Stone Horizon collections to the processing of agave or yucca for food or fiber. The mortar and pestle, associated with acorns or other foods processed through pounding, were first used during the Milling Stone Horizon and increased dramatically in later periods (Wallace 1955, 1978; Warren 1968).

3.1.3 Intermediate Horizon (3000 B.C. – A.D. 500)

Wallace’s Intermediate Horizon dates from approximately 3000 B.C.-A.D. 500 and is characterized by a shift toward a hunting and maritime subsistence strategy, as well as greater use of plant foods. During the Intermediate Horizon, a noticeable trend occurred toward greater

Ventura Unified School District 4 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

adaptation to local resources including a broad variety of fish, land mammal, and sea mammal remains along the coast. Tool kits for hunting, fishing, and processing food and materials reflect this increased diversity, with flake scrapers, drills, various projectile points, and shell fishhooks being manufactured.

Mortars and pestles became more common during this transitional period, gradually replacing manos and metates as the dominant milling equipment. Many archaeologists believe this change in milling stones signals a change from the processing and consuming of hard seed resources to the increasing reliance on acorn (e.g., Glassow et al. 1988; True 1993). Mortuary practices during the Intermediate typically included fully flexed burials oriented toward the north or west (Warren 1968:2-3).

3.1.4 Late Prehistoric Horizon (A.D. 500–Historic Contact)

During Wallace’s (1955, 1978) Late Prehistoric Horizon the diversity of plant food resources and land and sea mammal hunting increased even further than during the Intermediate Horizon. More classes of artifacts were observed during this period and high quality exotic lithic materials were used for small finely worked projectile points associated with the bow and arrow. Steatite containers were made for cooking and storage and an increased use of asphalt for waterproofing is noted. More artistic artifacts were recovered from Late Prehistoric sites and cremation became a common mortuary custom. Larger, more permanent villages supported an increased population size and social structure (Wallace 1955:223).

3.2 ETHNOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW

The project site is within the ethnographic territory of the Ventureño Chumash. The Chumash inhabited the coast between Malibu in Los Angeles County to the south and San Marcos Creek near the Monterey County line to the north, on the northern Channel Islands, and east as far as the edge of Kern County (Milliken and Johnson 2005). The Chumash territory has been separated into seven parts based on linguistic group (Kroeber 1925; Milliken and Johnson 2005). The Chumashan language is considered an isolate stock with a long history in the Santa Barbara region (Mithun 2001:304).

Early Spanish accounts describe the Santa Barbara Channel as heavily populated at the time of contact. Estimates of the total Chumash population range from 8,000-10,000 (Kroeber 1925:551) to 18,000-22,000 (Cook and Heizer 1965: 21). Coastal Chumash lived in hemispherical dwellings made of tule reed mats, or animal skins in rainy weather. These houses could usually lodge as many as 60 people (Brown 2001). The village of šukuw, (or shuku), at Rincon Point, was encountered by Gaspar de Portola in 1769. This village had 60 houses and seven canoes, with an estimated population of 300 (Grant 1978).

The tomol, or wooden plank canoe, was an especially important tool for the procurement of marine resources and for maintaining trade networks between Coastal and Island Chumash. Sea mammals were hunted with harpoons, while deep-sea fish were caught using nets and hooks and lines. Shellfish were gathered from beach sands using digging sticks, and mussels and abalone were pried from rocks using wood or bone wedges.

Ventura Unified School District 5 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

The acorn was an especially important resource. Acorn procurement and processing involved the manufacture of baskets for gathering, winnowing, and cooking and the production of mortars and milling stones for grinding. Bow and arrow, spears, traps and other various methods were used for hunting (Hudson and Blackburn 1979). The Chumash also manufactured various other utilitarian and nonutilitarian items. Eating utensils, ornaments, fishhooks, harpoons, and other items were made using bone and shell. Olivella shell beads were especially important for trade.

The Chumash were heavily impacted by the arrival of Europeans. The Spanish missions and later Mexican and American settlers dramatically altered traditional Chumash lifeways. Chumash population was drastically affected by the introduction of European diseases. However, many Chumash descendants still inhabit the region.

3.3 HISTORIC OVERVIEW

Post-European contact history for the state of California is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish Period (1769–1822), the Mexican Period (1822–1848), and the American Period (1848–present).

3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769–1822)

Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo in 1542 led the first European expedition to what is now called southern California. For more than 200 years, Cabrillo and other Spanish, Portuguese, British, and Russian explorers sailed the Alta (upper) California coast and made limited inland expeditions, but they did not establish permanent settlements (Bean 1968; Rolle 2003).

Gaspar de Portolá and Franciscan Father Junípero Serra established the first Spanish settlement in Alta California at Mission San Diego de Alcalá in 1769. This was the first of 21 missions erected by the Spanish between 1769 and 1823. Portolá continued north, passing through the project vicinity and reaching San Francisco Bay in 1769. In 1782, Father Junípero Serra founded Mission San Buenaventura, in what is now downtown Ventura.

3.3.2 Mexican Period (1822–1848)

The Mexican Period commenced when news of the success of the Mexican Revolution (1810- 1821) against the Spanish crown reached California in 1822. This period was an era of extensive interior land grant development and exploration by American fur trappers west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The California missions declined in power and were ultimately secularized in 1834. Governor Pío Pico and his predecessors made more than 600 rancho grants between 1833 and 1846, putting most of the state’s lands into private ownership for the first time (Gumprecht 1999). Gold was found in 1842 at Placerita Canyon in Los Angeles County, the first to be found in California.

The Mexican Period for Ventura County and adjacent areas ended in early January 1847. Mexican forces fought combined U.S. Army and Navy forces in the Battle of the San Gabriel

Ventura Unified School District 6 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

River on January 8 and in the Battle of La Mesa on January 9 (Nevin 1978). On January 10, leaders of the Pueblo of Los Angeles surrendered peacefully after Mexican General Jose Maria Flores withdrew his forces. Shortly thereafter, newly appointed Mexican Military Commander of California Andrés Pico surrendered all of Alta California to U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel John C. Fremont in the Treaty of Cahuenga (Nevin 1978).

3.3.3 American Period (1848–Present)

The American Period officially began with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, in which the United States agreed to pay Mexico $15 million for the conquered territory, including California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. Settlement of southern California continued to increase during the early American Period. Many ranchos in the county were sold or otherwise acquired by Americans, and most were subdivided into agricultural parcels or towns.

The discovery of gold in northern California in 1848 led to the California Gold Rush (Guinn 1977; Workman 1935:26). The presence of commercial grade oil in what became Ventura County was recognized in 1852 at Rancho Ojai (Franks and Lambert 1985). By 1853, the population of California exceeded 300,000. Thousands of settlers and immigrants continued to pour into the state, particularly after the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869 and into the real estate “boom of the Eighties” (Dumke 1944).

3.3.3.1 City of Ventura

Ventura gets its name from Mission San Buenaventura, which was founded in 1782 by Father Junípero Serra. The City of Ventura was incorporated in 1866, and became the County seat in 1873 when Santa Barbara and Ventura counties split. At this time, the courthouse, wharf, bank, and public library were built (City of Ventura, 2010).

Expanding oil development spurred growth in the city during the early twentieth century (Franks and Lambert 1985). Following World War II, farmland gave way to suburban expansion. Ventura has grown into a seaside community well-known for its scenic coastline, historic downtown, and rich culture (City of Ventura, 2010).

3.3.3.2 E.P. Foster

Eugene P. (or E.P.) Foster, was born in 1848. In 1854, the Foster family crossed the plains to California with a wagon train of oxen. They first settled in Half Moon Bay and later moved to Santa Barbara in 1868. In 1873, E. P. Foster moved to Ventura County, where he took a job with the Santa Ana Water Company as a ditch tender. He later became the manager of the water company. He also was involved in the selling of real estate. Foster owned orchards in Ventura County. He later sold these orchards in order to buy stock in the Bank of Ventura, which he became the president of in 1890. He continued as President of the Bank until 1917, and remained as the chairman of the advisory committee (Percy 1976).

Ventura Unified School District 7 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

E. P. Foster, along with K. P. Grant, acquired land for the first Ventura County Park, which they bought and presented to the County as Camp Comfort Park. Foster and his wife also bought the second park in Ventura County, Foster Park, and the Ventura County Fair Grounds. Later, Foster and his wife presented the County with the Ventura Library. Foster also organized the construction of the first Rincon Highway, from Ventura to Santa Barbara (Percy 1976). In addition, Foster served as the president of the school board (Clerici and Foxman 2010). Foster’s business success and local philanthropy have resulted in him long being considered one of the preeminent citizens of Ventura. His contributions to the city remain important elements of the community to this day.

4.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH

4.1 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM

At Rincon’s request, on October 8, 2012, the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton, conducted a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). The search was conducted to identify all previously conducted cultural resources work within the project area and a 0.5-mile radius around the project area, as well as to identify previously recorded cultural resources within or near the project area. The CHRIS search included a review of the NRHP, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), the California Points of Historical Interest list, the California Historical Landmarks list, the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility list, and the California State Historic Resources Inventory list. The records search also included a review of all available historic USGS 7.5- and 15-minute quadrangle maps.

A total of 13 studies have been conducted with a 0.5 mile radius of the project area (Table 1). An additional 18 studies have been conducted within the region but are not mapped due to insufficient information.

Ventura Unified School District 8 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Table 1 Previously Conducted Studies Within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area

SCCIC Study Proximity to Author Year Report No. Project Area Archaeological Assessment for City of San Buenaventura Outside VN-00214 Lopez, R. 1979 EIR 705 (m-2572.15) An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the 143 Acres of Outside VN-00228 Lopez, R. 1979 the Dent Ranch Involved in Environmental Impact Report 677 City of San Buenaventura, Ventura County, California Preliminary Cultural Resource Survey and Potential Outside VN-01102 Singer, Clay A. 1977 Impact Assessment for Thirteen Areas in Southern Ventura County, California Schmidt, J. Cultural Resource Investigation Outside VN-01275 and June 1994 Schmidt The Results of a Phase 1 Archaeological Study for Outside Approximately 37 Acres, Located on the Southwest VN-01341 Wlodarski, R. 1995 Corner of Las Posas Road and Laguna Road, City of Camarilo, County of Ventura, California Underground Utility District 15/ Project No. 66094 Outside VN-01849 Maki, M. K. 2000

Negative Phase I Archaeological Survey & Impact Outside VN-01851 Maki, M. K. 2000 Assessment of Approximately 440 Linear Feet for the Westside Street Improvements Project Ventura Avenue Bridge Widening and Rail Installation on State Route 33, Outside VN-01910 Sriro, Adam 2000 Ventura Co. Cultural Resources Records Search Results and Site Visit Outside for Cingular Wireless Candidate Vn-0140-01 VN-02527 Bonner, W. H. 2006 (McDonald’s), 11444 North Ventura Avenue, Ventura, Ventura County, California Phase I Archaeological Survey of Approximately 3,300 Outside Linear Feet for the Underground Utility District 15 VN-02534 Maki, M. K. 2002 Addition, City of San Buenaventura, Ventura County, California Phase I Archaeological Survey of Approximately 3,300 Outside Linear Feet for the Underground Utility District 15 VN-02541 Lopez, R. 2003 Addiction, City of San Buenaventura, Ventura County California A Phase I Archaeological Study for a 9-acre Site Outside Wlodarski, R. Encompassing 2701 and 2709 North Ventura Avenue VN-02602 2007 J. (APN# 068-0-040-025 and 068-0-030-015) Ventura County, California Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of Approximately Outside 3 Acres for the Ventura County Watershed Protection VN-02808 Maki, M. K. 2008 District’s Ventura River Bank Restoration Project Upstream of Stanley Avenue, City of San Buenaventura, Ventura County, California Source: South Central Coastal Information Center

Ventura Unified School District 9 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

There are 12 properties listed by the California Historic Resources Inventory within a 0.5-mile radius of the project area that have been evaluated for historical significance, one of which is within the project area (Table 2). The property listed within the project area is the E.P. Foster House (P-56-150491), detailed later within this report.

The SCCIC records search identified three archaeological sites within a 0.5 mile radius of the project area (Table 2). The National Archaeological Database listings for these studies are included with the records search summary in Appendix B. No archaeological sites were recorded within the project area.

4.1.1 P-56-001109 (Historic Railroad Berm)

This historic period railroad berm represents the first and only railroad spur to enter the Ojai Valley. The railroad extends from Ventura to Ojai and was constructed in 1898. The rails have been removed but the berm is still present throughout the route. No information was identified regarding the NRHP or CRHR eligibility of the berm.

4.1.2 P-56-001547 (Multi-component Artifact Deposit)

This site was recorded in 1993 by James and June Schmidt. The site represents a deposit of mixed cultural origin encountered along a railroad track. Cultural materials include a stone construct, a scatter of prehistoric materials, a historic refuse deposit, and concrete structures associated with the railroad. The stone construct is a wall of stream cobbles that appears to have been breached upon construction of the railroad tracks. It is unclear whether this feature is historic or prehistoric. The prehistoric materials include flaked stone debitage, chert and quartzite cores, a medial fragment of a Monterey chert biface, and fragments of faunal shell and bone. Historic refuse includes bottle glass, decomposed metal fragments, sun-colored amethyst glass, and semi-automatic bottle machine manufactured bases. No information was identified regarding the NRHP or CRHR eligibility of the site.

4.1.3 P-56-001600 (Historic Artifact Scatter)

This site represents a scatter of historic artifacts around a corrugated metal building. Artifacts include: a Chinese coin; Asian and Euro-American ceramics; dark olive, sun-colored amethyst, aqua, and brown glass; black core roof and floor tiles; and amorphous metal. Several cobble concentrations suggest a possible adobe foundation. The site is thought to date from the early 1800s to turn of the century and is most likely associated with turn of the century farm buildings torn down in the 1990s. The roof and floor tiles suggest a Spanish or Mexican period structure in association with the Ventura Mission or later rancho Ex Mission San Buenaventura. No information was identified regarding the NRHP or CRHR eligibility of the site.

Ventura Unified School District 10 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Table 2 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area

Recorded By Proximity Primary Description NRHP/CRHR Eligibility Status and Year to Project Number Area H. Switalski and Outside 56-001109 Historic railroad berm Insufficient data A. Bardsley, 2012 J. Schmidt and Outside Multi-component deposit of 56-001547 Insufficient data J. Schmidt, mixed artifacts 1993 N. Toren and Outside Surface scatter of historic 56-001600 Insufficient data A.G. Toren, artifacts 1999 6Y: Determined ineligible for NR by Outside consensus through Section 106 56-152280 96 Franklin Lane Insufficient data process-Not evaluated for CR or Local Listing 3S: Appears eligible for NR as an Outside 56-150421 111 Franklin Lane individual property through survey Insufficient data evaluation 3S: Appears eligible for NR as an Outside 386 Franklin Lane; Residence 56-150422 individual property through survey Insufficient data of Judge Ben T. Williams evaluation 7R: Identified in Reconnaissance Outside 56-150483 1985 N Ventura Ave Insufficient data Level Survey: Not evaluated 5S2: Individual property that is Outside 56-150484 2025 N Ventura Ave eligible for local listing or Insufficient data designation 2323 N Ventura Ave; Henry H. 7R: Identified in Reconnaissance Outside 56-150485 Insufficient data Neel Ranch Level Survey: Not evaluated 3S: Appears eligible for NR as an Outside 2400 N Ventura Ave; Dent 56-150486 individual property through survey Insufficient data Ranch evaluation 3S: Appears eligible for NR as an Outside 2453 N Ventura Ave; Albert H. 56-150487 individual property through survey Insufficient data Barney Residence evaluation 2626 N Ventura Ave; Charles 7R: Identified in Reconnaissance Outside 56-150488 Insufficient data W. H. Marriott Residence Level Survey: Not evaluated 3S: Appears eligible for NR as an Outside 2647 N Ventura Ave; Avenue 56-150489 individual property through survey Insufficient data School evaluation 5S2: Individual property that is Outside 2686 N Ventura Ave; Willett 56-150490 eligible for local listing or Insufficient data Ranch designation 5S2: Individual property that is Within 2717 N Ventura Ave; E.P. 56-150491 eligible for local listing or J. Triem, 1983 Foster House designation Source: South Central Coastal Information Center

Ventura Unified School District 11 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

4.2 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Rincon Consultants initiated Native American coordination for this project on October 5, 2012. As part of the process of identifying cultural resources within or near the project area, we contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF). The NAHC faxed a response on October 8, 2012 (Appendix C), and stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified in the project area you specified…” The NAHC provided a contact list of 20 Native American individuals or tribal organizations that may have knowledge of cultural resources in or near the project area. Rincon prepared and mailed letters (Appendix C) to each of the NAHC-listed contacts on October 8, 2012, requesting information regarding any Native American cultural resources within or immediately adjacent to the project area.

On October 10, 2012, Patrick Tumamait, an Ojai resident of Chumash descent, responded that he is aware of Native American archaeological sites within the general vicinity of the project area. Mr. Tumamait presented information to Rincon Cultural Resources Program Manager Kevin Hunt regarding the site approximately two miles north of the project area. They also discussed the sites identified within 0.5 mile of the project area during the records search. Mr. Tumamait recommended archaeological survey and both archaeological and Native American monitoring of all project-related ground disturbing activities.

On October 15, 2012, Freddie Romero of the Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Elders Council responded via telephone that he would like to discuss the project. Kevin Hunt returned his call on October 22. Mr. Romero stated that the project area is outside his band’s area of interest and that they defer to local tribes. Mr. Hunt confirmed that Patrick Tumamait had already responded about the project.

On November 1, 2012, Isabel M. Ayala, Ventura County Regional Representative of the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation, responded via email requesting that Rincon contact the band if the project has the potential to or will impact any Native American cultural resources. Kevin Hunt responded via email on November 2, 2012, that no Native American cultural resources were identified within or near the project area during the study.

As of November 7, 2012, no additional responses have been received.

Ventura Unified School District 12 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

5.0 FIELDWORK

5.1 FIELD SURVEY

Rincon Archaeologist Hannah Haas conducted an archaeological survey of the project area on October 18, 2012. The archaeological resources survey consisted of walking parallel transects oriented east-west and spaced no greater than five meters apart over the project area, excluding the area occupied by the Head Start Preschool and the Avenue School, because these areas were fenced off and will not be affected by the project. The area surveyed was approximately 4.5 acres of the 7.44 acres total. Ground visibility within the surveyed area was fair (approximately 70%). The remaining 30 percent had poor visibility because of leaf mulch, or standing buildings.

Ms. Haas examined all areas of exposed ground surface for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., chipped stone tools and production debris, stone milling tools, ceramics), historic debris (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics), or soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden. She recorded site characteristics and survey conditions using a field notebook and a digital camera. Copies of the field notes and digital photographs are on file with Rincon Consultants.

The archaeological survey yielded negative results. However, one historical refuse scatter was observed outside the project area and off of the property northwest and downslope of the outbuildings. This refuse scatter would not be impacted by the project.

Photograph 1. E.P. Foster Residence outbuildings

Ventura Unified School District 13 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Photograph 2. View of project area, facing north.

6.0 FINDINGS

No evidence of cultural resources related to Native Americans or other traditional groups was identified within or adjacent to the project area. No historic archaeological resources were identified in the project area. A historical refuse deposit was observed outside the project area but is not located on the subject property and would not be impacted by this project. Although one Native American contact recommended archaeological and Native American monitoring, the nearest known Native American cultural resource is approximately 0.3 mile away and the area is considered to have low sensitivity for prehistoric or Native American cultural resources.

6.1 E.P. FOSTER RESIDENCE (P-56-150491)

The E.P. Foster Residence, located at 2717 North Ventura Avenue, is estimated to have been originally built in 1881 with later modifications. The residence included the main house and two outbuildings: an employee residence, and two story building with garage and guest quarters above. The primary residence was recorded as a historical resource by Judy Triem in 1983. In 2010, the main house burned down in a fire. The outbuildings to be demolished for the current project were examined by architectural historian Judy Triem and preservation planner Mitch Stone of San Buenaventura Research Associates of Santa Paula, CA (see accompanying report for information on the outbuildings).

Ventura Unified School District 14 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed project will not have an effect on any known cultural resources. The following guidelines should be followed in the event of unanticipated cultural resources.

7.1 UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES

If cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983) must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data recovery excavation may be warranted.

7.2 UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS

The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the Ventura County Coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Ventura Unified School District 15 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

8.0 REFERENCES Arnold, Jeanne E., Michael R. Walsh, and Sandra E. Hollimon 2004 The Archaeology of California. Journal of Archaeological Research Vol. 12, No. 1. Bean, Walton 1968 California: An Interpretive History. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. Brown, Alan K. (editor) 2001 A Description of Distant Roads: Original Journals of the First Expedition into California, 1769–1770, by Juan Crespi. Translated by Alan K. Brown. San Diego State University Press, San Diego. Byrd, Brian F., and L. Mark Raab 2007 Prehistory of the Southern Bight: Models for a New Millennium. In California Prehistory, edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 215-228. Altimira Press, New York. Clerici, Kevin and Adam Foxman 2010 Historic E.P. Foster House Destroyed in Early Morning Fire. Ventura County Star. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2010/aug/03/morning-report-fire-burns- abandoned-ventura/?print=1 Cook, Sherburne A., and Robert F. Heizer 1965 The Quantitative Approach to the Relations between Population and Settlement Size. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 64. Berkeley. Dillon, Brian D. 2002 California Paleo-Indians: Lack of Evidence, or Evidence of a Lack? In Essays in California Archaeology: A Memorial to Franklin Fenenga, edited by W. J. Wallace and F. A. Riddell, pp. 110–128. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 60, Berkeley. Dumke, Glenn S. 1944 The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. Sixth printing, 1991. Huntington Library Publications, San Marino, California. Erlandson, Jon M. 1991 Early Maritime Adaptations on the Northern Channel Islands. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. Colten. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Erlandson, Jon M., Theodore Cooley, and Richard Carrico 1987 A Fluted Projectile Point Fragment from the Southern California Coast: Chronology and Context at CA-SBA-1951. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9:120– 128. Franks, Kenny A., and Paul F. Lambert 1985 Early California Oil: A Photographic History, 1965-1940. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

Ventura Unified School District 16 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Glassow, Michael A, L. Wilcoxen, and J. M. Erlandson 1988 Cultural and Environmental Change during the Early Period of Santa Barbara Channel Prehistory. In The Archaeology of Prehistoric Coastlines, edited by G. Bailey and J. Parkington pp. 64–77. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Grant, C. 1978 Eastern Coastal Chumash. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W.C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Guinn, J.M. 1977 Gold! Gold! Gold! from San Francisquito! In Los Angeles Biography of a City, edited by John Caughey and LaRee Caughey. University of California Press, Berkeley. Gumprecht, Blake 1999 The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death and Possible Rebirth. John Hopkins University Press. Baltimore. Hudson, T.D., and T.C. Blackburn 1979 The Material Culture of the Chumash Interaction Sphere. Volume I: Food Procurement and Transportation. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers 25. Johnson, J. R., T. W. Stafford, Jr., H. O. Ajie, and D. P. Morris 2002 Arlington Springs Revisited. In Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium, edited by D. Browne, K. Mitchell, and H. Chaney, pp. 541–545. USDI Minerals Management Service and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar 2007 California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. AltaMira Press, Berkeley, California. Koerper, Henry C., and Christopher E. Drover 1983 Chronology Building for Coastal Orange County: The Case from CA-ORA-119-A. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 19(2):1–34. Koerper, Henry C., Roger D. Mason, and Mark L. Peterson 2002 Complexity, Demography, and Change in Late Holocene Orange County. In Catalysts to Complexity: Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, pp. 63–81. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Vol. 6, Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Kowta, Makoto 1969 The Sayles Complex, A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from the Cajon Pass and the Ecological Implications of its Scraper Planes. University of California Publications in Anthropology 6:35–69. Berkeley, California. Kroeber, Alfred J. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78. Originally published 1925, Smithsonian Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Unabridged reprint 1976, Dover Publications, Inc. New York.

Ventura Unified School District 17 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Mason, Roger D., and Mark L. Peterson 1994 Newport Coast Archaeological Project: Newport Coast Settlement Systems–Analysis and Discussion, Volume 1, part 1 of 2. Prepared by The Keith Companies. On file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. Milliken, R.T., and J.R. Johnson 2005 An Ethnogeography of Salinan and Northern Chumash – 1769 to 1810. Report prepared for Caltrans District 5. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis. Mithun, Marianne 2001 The Languages of Native North America. Reprinted. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Originally published 1999, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Moratto, Michael 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. National Park Service 1983 Archaeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. Electronic document accessed December 6, 2011. Online at http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/Arch_Standards.htm. Nevin, David 1978 The Mexican War. Time-Life Books, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia. Percy, Richard Gird 1976 E.P. Foster and the Foster Family. Fragile Sands of Ventura. http://www.fragilesands.com/epfosterhouse.html Reinman, Fred M. 1964 Maritime Adaptations on San Nicolas Island, California. University of California Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1963–1964:47–80. Rick, Torben C., Jon M. Erlandson, and René Vellanoweth 2001 Paleocoastal Marine Fishing on the Pacific Coast of the Americas: Perspectives from Daisy Cave, California. American Antiquity 66:595–613. Rolle, Andrew 2003 California: A History. Revised and expanded sixth edition. Harlan Davidson, Inc., Wheeling, Illinois. True, Delbert L. 1993 Bedrock Milling Elements as Indicators of Subsistence and Settlement Patterns in Northern San Diego County, California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(2):1–26. Ventura, City of 2010 Ventura’s History. City of Ventura. http://www.cityofventura.net/about/history Warren, Claude N. 1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by C. Irwin-Williams, pp. 1–14. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 1. Portales.

Ventura Unified School District 18 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California Archaeological Survey

Workman, Boyle 1935 The City that Grew. Southland Publication Co., Los Angeles.

Ventura Unified School District 19

Appendix A Figure 1

Avenue School Outbuildings Demolition Project Archaeological Resources Study

Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors, 2012. USGS Topo, Copyright: © 2012 National Geographic Society. Ventura Quadrangle. The topographic representation depicted in this map may not portray all of the features currently found in the vicinity today and/or features depicted in this map may have changed since the original topographic map was assembled.

0 1,000 2,000 Feet Project Area ± 0 250 500 Meters One-Half Mile Buffer 1:24,000

Project Location Map Figure 1 Ventura Unified School District

Appendix B Records Search Summary

Appendix C Native American Correspondence

Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 Capitol Mall, RM 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 653-4082 (916) 657-5390 – Fax [email protected]

Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search

Date: October 5, 2012

Project: Avenue School Outbuildings Project

County: Ventura

USGS Quadrangle Name: Ventura, CA

Township 3N Range 23W Section(s) 28

Company/Firm/Agency: Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Contact Person: Kevin Hunt

Street Address: 5135 Avenida Encinas, Suite A

City: Carlsbad Zip: 92008

Phone: 760.918.9444, ext. 208

Fax: 760.918.9449

Email: [email protected]

Project Description: The Avenue School Outbuildings Project proposes to demolish two outbuildings associated with the previously destroyed (by fire) E.P. Foster House located at 2717 North Ventura Avenue, Ventura, CA. The project parcel is 7.44 acres, as depicted in the attached figure.

Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers Avenue School Outbuildings Demolition Project Archaeological Resources Study

Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors, 2012. USGS Topo, Copyright: © 2012 National Geographic Society. Ventura Quadrangle. The topographic representation depicted in this map may not portray all of the features currently found in the vicinity today and/or features depicted in this map may have changed since the original topographic map was assembled.

0 1,000 2,000 Feet Project Area ± 0 250 500 Meters One-Half Mile Buffer 1:24,000

Project Location Map Figure 1 Ventura Unified School District

October 9, 2012

Beverly Salazar Folkes 1931 Shadybrook Drive Thousand Oaks, CA 91362

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Salazar Folkes:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Vincent Armenta, Chairperson P.O. Box 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Chairperson Armenta:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

BarbarenoNentureno Band of Mission Indians Julie Lynn Tumamait-Stennslie, Chairwoman 365 North Poli Avenue Ojai, CA 93023

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Chairwoman Tumamait-Stennslie:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Patrick Tumamait 992 EI Camino Corto Ojai, CA 93023

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Tumamait:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

San Luis Obispo County Chumash Council Chief Mark Steven Vigil 1030 Ritchie Road Grover Beach, CA 93433

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Chief Vigil:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Owl Clan Qun-tan Shup 48825 Sapaque Road Bradley, CA 93426

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Qun-tan Shup:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Stephen William Miller 189 Cartagena Chumash Camarillo, CA 93010

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Miller:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Adelina Alva-Padilla, Chair Woman P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Chairwoman Alva-Padilla:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Randy Guzman - Folkes 6471 Cornell Circle Moorpark, CA 93021

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Guzman - Folkes:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Toni Cordero, Chairwoman P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara CA 93140

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Chairwoman Cordero:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Charles S. Parra P.O. Box 6612 Oxnard, CA 93031

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Parra:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Tribal Administrator P.O. Box 517 Santa Ynez, CA 93460

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Tribal Administrator:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Carol A. Pulido 165 Mountainview Street Oak View, CA 93022

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Pulido:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Melissa M. Parra-Hernandez 119 North Balsam Street Chum ash Oxnard, CA 93030

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Parra-Hernandez:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Frank Arredondo PO Box 161 Santa Barbara CA 93102

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Arredondo:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Santa Ynez Tribal Elders Council Freddie Romero, Cultural Preservation P.O. Box 365 Santa Ynez, CA 93460

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Romero:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians Kathleen Pappo 2762 Vista Mesa Drive Rancho Pales Verdes, CA 90275

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Pappo:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Mission Indians Raudel Joe Banuelos, Jr. 331 Mira Flores Court Camarillo, CA 93012

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Mr. Banuelos:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Janet Darlene Garcia P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Garcia:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

October 9, 2012

Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Crystal Baker P.O. Box 4464 Santa Barbara, CA 93140

RE: Archaeological Resources Study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Dear Ms. Baker:

Rincon Consultants has been retained to conduct an archaeological resources study for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project located at 2717 N. Ventura Avenue, Ventura, California. The proposed project entails the demolition of two outbuildings associated with the former E. P. Foster House, which was destroyed by fire in 2010.The outbuildings are located within a 7.44-acre parcel owned by Ventura Unified School District. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

As part of the process of identifying cultural resources issues for this project, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and a list of Native American tribal organizations and individuals who may have knowledge of sensitive cultural resources in or near the project area. The SLF search results stated that “Native American cultural resources were not identified” within one-half mile of the project area but recommended that we consult with you directly regarding your knowledge of the presence of cultural resources that may be impacted by this project.

If you have knowledge of cultural resources that may exist within or near the project area, please contact me in writing at the above address or [email protected], or by telephone at (760) 918-9444, extension 208. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Enclosure: Project Location Map

Record of Conversation October 10, 2012

10:30 AM

Project 12-00210: Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Mr. Patrick Tumamait Call received

Patrick Tumamait, an Ojai resident of Chumash descent, responded that he is aware of Native American archaeological sites within the general vicinity of the project area. Mr. Tumamait presented information regarding the site approximately two miles north of the project area. They also discussed the sites identified within 0.5 mile of the project area during the records search. Mr. Tumamait recommended archaeological survey and both archaeological and Native American monitoring of all project-related ground disturbing activities.

Rincon contact/recorded by: Kevin Hunt

Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers

Record of Conversation October 22, 2012

10:20 AM

Project 12-00210: Avenue School Outbuildings Project, Ventura, Ventura County, California

Mr. Freddie Romero Cultural Resources Consultant Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Elders Council 805-688-7997

On October 15, 2012, Freddie Romero of the Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Elders Council responded via telephone voicemail that he would like to discuss the project. Kevin Hunt returned his call on October 22. Mr. Romero stated that the project area is outside his band’s area of interest and that they defer to local tribes. Mr. Hunt confirmed that Patrick Tumamait had already responded about the project.

Rincon contact/recorded by: Kevin Hunt

Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers From: Kevin Hunt To: "[email protected]" Subject: FW: Archaeological Resources Study for Avenue School Buildings Project,Ventura, Ventura County,California Date: Friday, November 02, 2012 10:40:00 AM Attachments: image001.png image003.png image004.png

Dear Ms. Ayala,

The records search and survey for the Avenue School Outbuildings Project were negative for Native American resources within or near the project area. I will be sure to update you if any resources are encountered during project activities. Thank you for your response.

Regards, Kevin

Kevin Hunt Cultural Resources Program Manager

Rincon Consultants, Inc. 760 918 9444 EXT 208 MOBILE 760 207 9736 www.rinconconsultants.com Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers

Ranked “#1 Best Firm to Work For” – CE News

From: Ashley Myers Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:18 PM To: Kevin Hunt Subject: FW: Archaeological Resources Study for Avenue School Buildings Project,Ventura, Ventura County,California

Ashley Myers Administrative Assistant

Rincon Consultants, Inc. 805 644 4455 EXT 10 www.rinconconsultants.com Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

From: ISABEL AYALA [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:17 PM To: Ashley Myers Subject: Archaeological Resources Study for Avenue School Buildings Project,Ventura, Ventura County,California

Dear Mr Hunt, We have received your correspondence regarding your project. At this time we are requesting that you contact us if your project shave have the potential to or will impact any Native American cultural resources.

Isabel M. Ayala Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation Ventura County Regional Representative