Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2023-11-02 Council Agenda Packet
Thursday, November 2, 2023 9:00 AM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers (In Person and/or Electronic) City Council President - Tyler Maxwell Vice President - Annalisa Perea Councilmembers: Mike Karbassi, Miguel Angel Arias, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Georgeanne A. White City Attorney - Andrew Janz City Clerk - Todd Stermer, CMC Meeting Agenda - Final Regular Meeting 11/02/2023 MA/NE 7-0 APPROVED AS AMENDED November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final THE FRESNO CITY COUNCIL WELCOMES YOU TO CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER, LOCATED IN CITY HALL, 2ND FLOOR, 2600 FRESNO STREET, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93721. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – Public participation during Fresno City Council meetings is always encouraged and can occur in one of the two following ways: 1) Participate In Person: Council Chambers, City Hall, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 a) To speak during a City Council meeting in person: fill out a speaker card (available in the Council Chamber) and place it in the speaker card collection basket at the front of the Council Chamber. You may also approach the speaker podium upon the Council President’s call for public comment. 2) Participate Remotely via Zoom: https://fresno-gov.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_2TE5h1vjSMuFxW5sGqcEpw a) The above link will allow you to register in advance for remote participation in the meeting via the Zoom platform. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing additional details about joining the meeting. b) To speak during a City Council meeting while attending remotely: while in the Zoom application, click on the icon labeled “Participants” at the bottom of the screen. Then select “RaiseHand” at the bottom of the Participants window. Your digital hand will now be raised. You will be asked to “unmute” when your name is called to speak. You will not be visible via video and there will be no opportunity to share your screen. All public speakers will have up to 3 minutes to address Council pursuant to Rule No. 10 of the Rules of Procedure for the City Council of the City of Fresno (available in the City Clerk’s Office). SUBMIT DOCUMENTS / WRITTEN COMMENTS - Pursuant to Rule 11 (c) of the Rules of Procedure, no documents shall be accepted for Council review unless submitted to the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the Council Agenda item be heard. Documents / written comments related to an agenda item can be submitted by one of the following methods: 1) eComment – eComment allows the public to submit agenda related comments through a website prior to the meeting. Submitted comments are limited to 1440 characters and will be a part of the official record. Page 2 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final a) Submit an e-Comment by visiting https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx and selecting the “eComment” link. b) e-Comment is available for use upon publication of the agenda and closes 24 hours prior to the meeting start time [pursuant to Rule 11(c)]. c) e-Comment is not permitted for Land use or CEQA items d) The e-Comment Electronic User Agreement can be viewed at: https://www.fresno.gov/cityclerk/ 2) E-mail – Agenda related documents and comments can be e-mailed to the Office of the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the agenda item being heard, pursuant to Rule 11(c). a) E-mail the Clerk’s Office at clerk@fresno.gov b) E-mails should include the agenda date, and the related agenda item number. VIEWING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (non-participatory) - For your convenience, there are several ways to view Fresno City Council meetings live: 1) City of Fresno website: https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx (click “In Progress” to view the live meeting). 2) Community Media Access Collaborative website: https://cmac.tv/ 3) YouTube - City of Fresno Council, Boards and Commissions Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3ld83D8QGn1YBDw6aD5dZA/videos 4) Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FresnoCA/videos 5) Cable Television: Comcast Channel 96 and AT&T Channel 99 Should any of the five viewing methods listed above experience technical difficulties, the Council meeting will continue uninterrupted. Council meetings will only be paused to address verifiable technical difficulties for all users participating via Zoom or in the Council Chamber. The City of Fresno’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Anyone requiring reasonable ADA accommodations, including sign language interpreters, or other reasonable accommodations such as language translation, should contact the office of the City Clerk at (559) 621-7650 or clerk@fresno.gov. To help ensure availability of these services, you are advised to make your request a minimum of three business days prior to the scheduled meeting. Page 3 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 9:14 A.M. ROLL CALL Invocation by Senior Pastor, DJ Criner from Saint Rest Baptist Church Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS ID 23-1608 Celebrating EPU’s Gala of Light Honorees Sponsors:Council President Maxwell ID 23-1593 Proclamation for “Poverello House 50th Anniversary” Sponsors:Council President Maxwell ID 23-1582 Proclamation for “World Day of Remembrance” Sponsors:Councilmember Karbassi and Council President Maxwell ID 23-1517 Proclamation for “Honoring Sikh Heritage Month” Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager ID 23-1520 National Animal Shelter Appreciation Week Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager and Animal Center Department COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS MAYOR/MANAGER REPORTS AND COMMENTS CITY CLERK AND CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS AND COMMENTS UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION PLEASE NOTE: UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR A SPECIFIC TIME AND MAY BE HEARD ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING ID 23-1650 Public Comment Sponsors:Office of the City Clerk Page 4 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 1. CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-A.ID 23-1574 Approval of Minutes for October 19, 2023, Regular Meeting Sponsors:Office of the City Clerk 1.-B.ID 23-1554 RESOLUTION - Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant guidelines. Sponsors:Parks, After School and Recreation and Community Services Department 1.-C.ID 23-1592 ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the Sixth Amendment to Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183, amending Exhibit 14, Unit 14, Management Classes (CFMEA) by adding the new classification and providing a monthly salary step plan range for Clinic Manager, effective November 6, 2023 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). Sponsors:Personnel Services Department 1.-D.ID 23-1425 Approve a $253,673 HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Community Housing Development Organization Agreement with Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc ., for the construction of a single-family house at 64 E. Atchison Street in southwest Fresno (Council District 3). Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 1.-E.ID 23-1530 Approve an agreement for professional architectural engineering services with NJA Architecture, of Lodi, CA for $1,072,670, with an $80,000 contingency, for community outreach, infrastructure assessment, master planning, and schematic development services for the West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project (Council District 3). Sponsors:Capital Projects Department, Parks, After School and Recreation and Community Services Department 1.-F.ID 23-1472 Actions pertaining to the Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 (Bid File 12400215) (Council District 6): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301/Class 1 and 15302/Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract to Unified Field Services Corporation of Bakersfield, California, in the amount of $3,533,654 Page 5 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Sponsors:Capital Projects Department and Department of Public Utilities 1.-G.ID 23-1518 Approve the First Amendment to Service Contract with Partners in Control Inc., dba Enterprise Automation, to increase the value of the Service Contract by $97,754, for a revised fee of $247,673, to complete operational programming at Pump Station 117 (Fresno County island near Council Districts 4 and 6). Sponsors:Capital Projects Department and Department of Public Utilities 1.-H.ID 23-1539 Reject the bid for the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program Phase II Project at Various Locations - Bid File Number 12400024 (Council District 4 and 7) Sponsors:Capital Projects Department and Public Works Department 1.-I.ID 23-1559 Approve a first amendment to a service contract with Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., to increase the contract not-to-exceed amount for Biosolids reuse and disposal services in the amount of $2,826,866.69, for a total contract value of $9,198,866.69 (Bid File No. 9468) (Citywide) Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 1.-J.ID 23-1543 BILL - (For introduction) Amending the uncodified ordinance to adopt changes and additions to the official list of designated special speed zones for various streets within the City of Fresno pursuant to Section 14-1501 of the Fresno Municipal Code (Citywide). Sponsors:Public Works Department 1.-K.ID 23-1545 ***RESOLUTION- Authorizing the submission of grant applications to California Air Resource Board (CARB) Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP) Grant Program for Environmental Justice and Transportation Equity in West Fresno Projects totaling up to $12 million in requests of grant application funding and authorizing the execution of grant application and accepting the grant and completing grant agreement documents by the Department of Transportation Director or Designee(s). (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). Sponsors:Department of Transportation 1.-L.ID 23-1586 Approve the reappointment of Dr. Carole Goldsmith to the Regional Workforce Development Board for a term ending November 1, 2025. Sponsors:Councilmember Karbassi Page 6 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 1.-M.ID 23-1588 Resolution renaming the Roeding Dog Park Run to “Puppy Love” Dog Park Sponsors:Councilmember Arias 1.-N.ID 23-1589 ***RESOLUTION - Establishing the City of Fresno CHIPS Incentive Program (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Sponsors:Councilmember Esparza 1.-O.ID 23-1607 ***Resolution - Directing the City Manager or Designee to Notify the Council of Any Delays to Existing Citywide and District Projects Caused by New Public Works or Capital Projects, Acceptance of Grant Funds or the Reprograming of Funds (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Sponsors:Council President Maxwell CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 2. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS 10:00 A.M. ID 23-1506 HEARING to consider Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 pertaining to approximately 8.0 acres of property located on the east side of North Abby Street, between East Minarets/East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues (Council District 6) - Planning & Development Department. 1. DENY the appeal and ADOPT Environmental Assessment P22- 04122, dated May 5, 2023, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Sponsors:Planning and Development Department Page 7 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 10:05 A.M. ID 23-1594 Appearance by Camilla Sutherland to discuss Roading Park resurface of the tennis courts start date. (District 3 Resident) Sponsors:Office of the City Clerk 3. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 4. CITY COUNCIL 5. CLOSED SESSION 5.-A.ID 23-1489 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case Name: Leonard Lujan v. City of Fresno, PSI, Admin by Tristar Risk Management; Tristar Claim No.: 1010103818-ADR-1 Sponsors:City Attorney's Office 5.-B.ID 23-1510 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case Name: Michael Brogdon v. City of Fresno, PSI, Admin by Tristar Risk Management; Tristar Claim No.: 1010104473-ADR-1 Sponsors:City Attorney's Office 5.-C.ID 23-1513 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case Sponsors:City Attorney's Office 5.-D.ID 23-1488 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case Sponsors:City Attorney's Office Page 8 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 5.-E.ID 23-1601 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case Sponsors:City Attorney's Office 5.-F.ID 23-1603 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(2): 2 potential cases Sponsors:City Attorney's Office ADJOURNMENT UPCOMING SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS NOVEMBER 16, 2023 10:00 A.M. - Approve a Project-Specific Tax Sharing Agreement Between the City of Fresno and the County of Fresno Regarding Bullard-Maroa Reorganization No. 3 for approximately 0.85 acres of property located on the south side of West Bullard Avenue between North Maroa and North Winchester Avenues (Council District 4). NOVEMBER 16, 2023 10:05 A.M. - Regarding the Razor Wire Text Amendment (P23-01018) NOVEMBER 16, 2023 10:10 A.M. - Consideration of an appeal filed regarding Conditional Use Permit Application No. P23-00244, and related Environmental Assessment for property located at 3045 West Bullard Avenue on the southwest corner of West Bullard and North Marks Avenues (Council District 2). DECEMBER 7, 2023 10:00 A.M. - HEARING to adopt resolutions and ordinance to annex territory and levy a special tax regarding City of Fresno Community Facilities District No. 11, Annexation No. 147 (Final Tract Map No. 6269) (located on the southwest corner of North Willow Avenue and North Alicante Drive) (Council District 6) JANUARY 11, 2024 10:00 A.M. - Hold a public hearing and approve items related to the granting of a Non-Exclusive Roll-Off Franchise for roll-off collection services (Citywide) Page 9 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto November 2, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda - Final UPCOMING EMPLOYEE CEREMONIES EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - 10:00 A.M. • November 15, 2023 (Wednesday) - Employee Service Awards 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE November 16, 2023 - 9:00 A.M. December 7, 2023 - 9:00 A.M. December 14, 2023 - 9:00 A.M. Page 10 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1608 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TYLER MAXWELL, Council President District 4 SUBJECT Celebrating EPU’s Gala of Light Honorees City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 PRESENTED CITY OF FRESNO ___________________________________________ __________________________________________ JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ ANNALISA PEREA, Council Vice President MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember, District 2 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember, District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember, District 5 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember, District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember, District 7 byy|vx Éy VÉâÇv|Ä cÜxá|wxÇà gçÄxÜ `tåãxÄÄ Hereby Recognizes: etv{xÄ VtÅtv{É [tztÇá WHEREAS, Exceptional Parents Unlimited is honoring Rachel Camacho Hagans, Director of Case Management at the Central Valley Regional Center, with their “Beacon of Hope” Award, which recognizes individuals for their outstanding efforts and commitment in strengthening and empowering children and families facing extraordinary challenges; and WHEREAS, Rachel Camacho Hagans is the second recipient of Exceptional Parents Unlimited’s “Beacon of Hope” Award. She is retiring after forty years of working for the California Regional Center system, most recently as a leader of the Early Start program at the Central Valley Regional Center; and WHEREAS, Rachel Camacho Hagans has spent her career serving the community, bettering the lives of children, families, and persons with unique needs. She helped with the initial design of the Infant Family Service Plan in California and was a critical part in the development of the Early Start program in the state. She has served on the State Interagency Coordination Council, State Systematic Improvement Plan Team, and was a part of the Help Me Grow Fresno County leadership; and WHEREAS, The connection Rachel Camacho Hagans has to those she helps shines through the work she does and the staff she has trained. Her commitment to the community is unwavering, making her the clear choice for the “Beacon of Hope” Award and deserving of special public honors for her important work to the Fresno area. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer, and the Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 2, 2023 as: Âetv{xÄ VtÅtv{É [tztÇá WtçÊ in the City of Fresno IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the Great Seal of the City of Fresno, California, this second day of November of the Year Two Thousand and Twenty-Three. CITY OF FRESNO ___________________________________________ __________________________________________ JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ ANNALISA PEREA, Council Vice President MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember, District 2 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember, District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember, District 5 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember, District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember, District 7 byy|vx Éy VÉâÇv|Ä cÜxá|wxÇà gçÄxÜ `tåãxÄÄ Hereby Recognizes: KSEE 24/CBS 47 News WHEREAS, Exceptional Parents Unlimited is honoring KSEE 24/CBS 47 News with their “Hope Grows Here” Award, as they have generously donated hours of talent, filming, and airtime to promote the work Exceptional Parents Unlimited does for children and families; and WHEREAS, KSEE 24/CBS 47 are news stations in the Central San Joaquin Valley that share important and noteworthy stories within the region; and WHEREAS, KSEE 24/CBS 47 News have publicized how Exceptional Parents Unlimited strengthen and empower children and families facing extraordinary medical, developmental, and parenting challenges; and WHEREAS, The visibility of Exceptional Parents Unlimited in the community is due in large part to the coverage KSEE 24/CBS 47 have given them during news segments and the personalities from these stations who’ve supported their cause by serving as emcees at fundraising events, and much more; and WHEREAS, KSEE 24/CBS 47 are true partners in their dedication to helping keep the Exceptional Parents Unlimited vision alive, that children can grow up in families in which their individual needs are met, that their parents have confidence in themselves and in their ability to meet the needs of all family members, and that families have a sense of comfort with their personal situations that brings forth an internal sense of empowerment. KSEE 24/CBS 47 are deserving of special public honors and commendations for their partnership with Exceptional Parents Unlimited in helping to highlight the needs of thousands of Central Valley children and families with all kinds of special needs each year. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer, and the Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 2, 2023 as: “KSEE 24/CBS 47 News Day” in the City of Fresno IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the Great Seal of the City of Fresno, California, this second day of November of the Year Two Thousand and Twenty-Three. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1593 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TYLER MAXWELL, Council President District 4 SUBJECT Proclamation for “Poverello House 50th Anniversary” Attachment: Proclamation City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 PRESENTED CITY OF FRESNO ___________________________________________ __________________________________________ JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ ANNALISA PEREA, Council Vice President MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember, District 2 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember, District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember, District 5 ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember, District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember, District 7 byy|vx Éy VÉâÇv|Ä cÜxá|wxÇà gçÄxÜ `tåãxÄÄ Hereby Recognizes: cÉäxÜxÄÄÉ [ÉâáxËá HC à{TÇÇ|äxÜátÜç WHEREAS, Since 1973, the Poverello House has been one of the leading organizations in providing important services for the hungry, unhoused, and destitute in the Fresno area. Such services include: three hot meals every day of the year, emergency shelter for individuals and families, and support services like showers, laundry, and clothing. Additionally, the Poverello House offers a six-month to one-year rehabilitation program for men and mental health services for any client who requests their services. Navigation and case management are also available at the Poverello House, where these services are provided to anyone in need, no questions asked; and WHEREAS, Founder Mike McGarvin established the Poverello House in Fresno after he and his wife, Mary, moved from San Francisco, where he himself had experienced hardship, violence, substance abuse, and despair in the 1960s. Inspired by a place he found in San Francisco called “Poverello,” which was where his experience as a volunteer there moved him to serve others, Mr. McGarvin found his mission in life after witnessing the needs of the unhoused in Fresno; and WHEREAS, Mr. McGarvin’s work started out small; he would go out to the unhoused and hand out peanut butter sandwiches, talk to people, and let them know someone cared about them. Mr. McGarvin’s small ministry soon grew, and others began to join and help. A storefront building was obtained, and he named it after the place that had saved him in San Francisco: Poverello House. In the 1990s, it expanded to a larger building at its current location on 412 F Street, which allowed it to broaden its services to meet the needs of the community; and WHEREAS, Over the last half century, the organization has been devoted to serving the needy, living up to its mission, “Believing in the dignity of every person, at Poverello House we work to enrich the lives and spirits of all who pass our way by stewarding the resources made available to us through providential and community support.” In recognition of its fiftieth anniversary, the Poverello House is deserving of special public honors and commendations for its important work to the Fresno area. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer, and the Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 2, 2023 as: ÂcÉäxÜxÄÄÉ [Éâáx WtçÊ in the City of Fresno IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the Great Seal of the City of Fresno, California, this second day of November of the Year Two Thousand and Twenty-Three. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1582 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember District 2 TYLER MAXWELL, Council President District 4 SUBJECT Proclamation for “World Day of Remembrance” Attachment: Proclamation City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 PRESENTED CITY OF FRESNO byy|vx Éy VÉâÇv|Ä cÜxá|wxÇà `tåãxÄÄ 9 VÉâÇv|ÄÅxÅuxÜ ^tÜutáá| WHEREAS, on October 26. 2005, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims to globally acknowledge the millions of people that have tragically lost their lives due to roadway collisions; and WHEREAS, in 2022, according to data from NHTSA, there were 42,795 traffic fatalities nationally, 4,407 of these in California; and WHEREAS, in Fresno in 2022 there were 3,995 total collisions which included 192 pedestrians and 96 bicycles; and WHEREAS, in Fresno during 2023 as of October 12, 2023, there have been 3125 total collisions, 207 involving pedestrians and 96 involving bicycles; and WHEREAS, in Fresno during 2022 there were 50 total fatalities, including 28 pedestrian and 7 bicycle fatalities; and WHEREAS, in Fresno during 2023 as of October 12, 2023 there have been 29 total fatalities, including 14 pedestrian fatalities and 1 bicycle fatality; and WHEREAS, more than half of all road traffic fatalities involve vulnerable road users including pedestrians, cyclist, and motorcyclists; and WHEREAS, World Day of Remembrance also serves as an opportunity to thank the various emergency service responders that are crucial in responding to roadway collisions and to advocate for evidence-based, actions to prevent further road traffic deaths and injuries; and WHEREAS, the City of Fresno is committed to improving road safety for all by installing road safety infrastructure to support vulnerable road users; and WHEREAS, as a city, we strive to make our streets safe for all road users including motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, children, students, parents, seniors, and those living with limited mobility or disabilities; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we the Mayor and Fresno City Council recognize the third Sunday of November as World Day of Remembrance and pay homage to all the people across the world who have lost their life or have been seriously injured while using the road; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we, the Mayor, and Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 19, 2023 in the City of Fresno as: “World Day of Remembrance” in the City of Fresno. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 2nd day of November 2023. _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor MIKE KARBASSI , Councilmember District 2 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ANNALISA PEREA, Council Vice President _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember District 5 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember District 7 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1517 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION FROM:JERRY DYER, Mayor Office of the Mayor & City Manager Proclamation for “Honoring Sikh Heritage Month” Attachment: Proclamation City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 PRESENTED CITY OF FRESNO Office of Mayor Jerry P. Dyer _____ _________________________________ ________________________________ LEE BR JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ____ _________________________________ ESMER ANNALISA PEREA, Vice President MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember District 2 _____ _________________________________ PAUL C MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember District 5 _____ _________________________________ GARRY GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Council District 7 WHEREAS, Sikhism is the world’s fifth largest religion with more than thirty million adherents worldwide and an estimated 500,000 Sikh Americans; and WHEREAS, Sikhs have been living in the United States for more than 100 years. During the early 20th century, thousands of Sikh Americans worked on farms, in lumber mills and mines, and on the Oregon, Pacific, & Eastern Railway. They have made countless contributions to our country; and WHEREAS, 2023 is the 554th birthyear of Guru Nanak, the first of ten gurus and founder of Sikhism. Sikhs celebrate Guru Nanak’s Gurpurab (birth anniversary) worldwide and recognize it as one of the most important dates in the Sikh calendar; and WHEREAS, Vaisakhi is also a historically significant day for Sikhs and is celebrated worldwide on April 14th as the birth of Khalsa, a tradition of initiating Sikhs and promoting equality; and WHEREAS, Sikh-Americans distinguish themselves by fostering respect among all people by practicing the three key pillars in Sikhism – Kirat Karni (honest living) Vand Chhakna (sharing with others) and Naam Japna (remembrance of God); and WHEREAS, the Sikh community is important to California’s diversity, with more than 25% of Sikh Americans living in the state. Fresno has become a cultural center for Sikhism with a large and vibrant community; and WHEREAS, today, the City of Fresno seeks to further celebrate its diversity and afford all residents the opportunity to better understand, recognize, and appreciate the rich history of Sikh Americans. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, Mayor Jerry Dyer and Members of the Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 2023 to be: “Sikh Heritage Month” In the City of Fresno. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 2nd day of November 2023. Recognizing Sikh Heritage Month City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1520 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION FROM:JERRY DYER, Mayor Office of the Mayor & City Manager National Animal Shelter Appreciation Week Attachment: Certificates City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 PRESENTED CITY OF FRESNO Office of Mayor Jerry P. Dyer _____ _________________________________ ________________________________ LEE BR JERRY P. DYER, Honorable Mayor TYLER MAXWELL, Council President ____ _________________________________ ESMER ANNALISA PEREA, Vice President MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember District 2 _____ _________________________________ PAUL C MIGUEL ARIAS, Councilmember District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember District 5 _____ _________________________________ GARRY GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Council District 7 WHEREAS, The Humane Society of the United States in 1996 named November’s first full week as National Animal Shelter Appreciation Week to highlight animal welfare organizations’ role in communities across the nation; and WHEREAS, Fresno area animal welfare organizations provide critical community services such as adoption, low or no cost sterilizations, vaccination clinics, veterinary care, and community cat care; and WHEREAS, animal welfare organizations make positive contributions to the lives of animals and humans alike: helping reunite lost pets with their families, investigating and prosecuting animal cruelty cases, caring for community cat populations, rescuing injured animals, organizing animal rescue transportation, and providing educational resources to the public; and WHEREAS, animal welfare organization workers often volunteer their services, work tirelessly, endlessly, and are great advocates for the animals and citizens they serve; and WHEREAS, there are an estimated six- to eight-million homeless animals that seek refuge each year. Animal welfare organizations work to find forever homes for these animals; and WHEREAS, every day local animal welfare staffs provide care and comfort to shelter animals and serve their communities with dignity, kindness, compassion, and respect; and WHEREAS, the City of Fresno recognizes local animal welfare organizations and their staffs for the long hours of work they perform in serving both the animals and residents of our community, and for their passion and commitment to help animals. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, Mayor Jerry Dyer, City Manager Georgeanne White and Members of the Fresno City Council, do hereby proclaim November 5-11 to be: “National Animal Shelter Appreciation Week” In the City of Fresno. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 2nd day of November 2023. In Honor of Animal Shelter Appreciation Week City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1650 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TODD STERMER, City Clerk Office of the City Clerk SUBJECT Public Comment Attachment: Public Comment Submitted City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISTRIBUTED 1 Mary Quinn From:Caleb Helsel (Caleb Helsel) > Sent:Wednesday, November 1, 2023 11:59 PM To:Clerk Subject:Public Comment, Palestine Solidarity Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed External Email: Use caution with links and attachments Dear Fresno City Council, My name is Caleb Helsel. I am writing this comment to express my support for the motion for the city of Fresno to officially stand with Palestine against genocide and ethnic cleansing at the hands of Israel. Since the October 7, Hamas attacks on Israel, the Gaza Strip has been subject to a brutal and inhumane siege that threatens the lives of 2 million people. They have cut off food, water, fuel, and Internet to the people of Gaza in the name of destroying Hamas. This is collective punishment, a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. They have bombarded them constantly for a month, rendering the majority of the population homeless and killing over 8,000 people, with half of them being children. The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated places in the world, with 2 million people forcibly clustered inside an area of around 140 square miles, as densely populated as London or Tel Aviv. The majority of these people are descendants of Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from the lands during the 1948 creation of Israel. Their descendants remain trapped in Gaza today, legally barred from entering Israel, and unable to leave by sea of into Egypt since 2006. These people are defenseless and have no escape from their torment. The Israeli government has branded Gaza’s population as “terrorists” and “animals”. They have declared that “a whole nation is responsible”. They quote verses from the Bible calling for the total destruction of a people. This is genocide. The world has stood by and watched genocide happen before: the Armenians in WW1, the Jews in WW2, the Tutsis in Rwanda, and the native Americans in this very country and this very state. We are in a position now to break that trend, to do something different. To be better than our ancestors. And so today, I join the many people who will be there tomorrow in person to call for Fresno to follow Richmond, California’s lead and pass a resolution declaring it’s support for Palestine against genocide. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1574 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-A. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TODD STERMER, City Clerk Office of the City Clerk SUBJECT Approval of Minutes for October 19, 2023, Regular Meeting Attachment: Draft Minutes for October 19, 2023, Regular Meeting City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 APPROVED ON CONSENT 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov City of Fresno Meeting Minutes City Council President - Tyler Maxwell Vice President - Annalisa Perea Councilmembers: Mike Karbassi, Miguel Angel Arias, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Georgeanne A. White City Attorney - Andrew Janz City Clerk - Todd Stermer, CMC 9:00 AM Council Chambers (In Person and/or Electronic) Thursday, October 19, 2023 Regular Meeting The City Council met in regular session in the Council Chamber, City Hall, on the date and time above written. 9:10 A.M. ROLL CALL Councilmember Nelson Esparza Council President Tyler Maxwell Vice President Annalisa Perea Councilmember Mike Karbassi Councilmember Miguel Angel Arias Councilmember Luis Chavez Councilmember Garry Bredefeld Present:7 - Invocation by Reverend Jessica Harmon, who is the Cathedral Curate at St. James Episcopal Cathedral Reverend Jessica Harmon gave the invocation. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag Councilmember Bredefeld led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVE AGENDA City Clerk Stermer announced the following changes to the agenda: Consent Calendar Item 1-M (ID 23-1525) regarding the 5th Amendment to Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183, amending Exhibit 3, Unit City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 1 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 3, Non-Supervisory White Collar (FCEA) - there was a correction to Exhibit 13-1, Unit 13, Exempt Supervisory and Professional (CFPEA) to update the Animal Center Supervisor monthly salary from $5,687 - $6,913 to $6,450 - $7,803 in the staff report, Resolution and Salary Tables. Closed Session item 5-B (ID 23-1529) regarding CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case name: 1 Community Compact v. City of Fresno. – was removed from the agenda by the City Attorney’s Office. Vice President Perea recused herself from Consent Calendar item 1-Q (ID 23-1443) regarding Woodward Tot Lot and ADA Accessibility Improvements. THE FOLLOWING CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS WERE MOVED TO CONTESTED CONSENT FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION: 1-B (ID 23-1511) regarding the appointment of Chenier Derrick to the Disability Advisory Commission for a term ending June 30, 2024. Approve the appointment of Kurt Madden to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board for a term ending November 1, 2025. Approve the reappointments of Edgar Blunt, Scott Miller, and Terry Metters Jr. to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board for terms ending November 1, 2025 – was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. 1-D (ID 23-1379) regarding the rebudget of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) grant funding within various Departments – was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. 1-F (ID 23-1484) regarding the Fresno Fire Department’s Firefighting Turnouts - was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. 1-H (ID 23-1482) regarding the award of a construction contract for the City Hall North and South Parking Lot Security Camera project adding a total of 40 security cameras to the North and South parking lots (Bid File 12302202) - was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. 1-L ( ID 23-1466) regarding the FY24 Position Authorization Resolution No. 2023-184: 1: ***RESOLUTION - Adopt the 5th Amendment to Position Authorization Resolution (PAR) No. 2023-184, adding three (3) full-time positions in the Public Works Department (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) - was moved to Contested Consent by Council President Maxwell. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 2 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 1-O (ID 23-1485) regarding the homeless youth services agreement provided under the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program (Bid File 12400090 - was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Chavez. 1-R (ID 23-1483) regarding a construction contract for the Base Bid plus all eight (8) Add Alternates in the total amount of $8,646,293 to Avison Construction, Inc of Madera, CA - was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. 1-W (ID 23-1490) regarding a contract to ScrubCan Inc., a California corporation, to provide janitorial services at Department of Public Utilities facilities - was moved to Contested Consent by Councilmember Arias. On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Karbassi,the agenda was APPROVED AS AMENDED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS ID 23-1458 Proclamation for “National Latino/a Physician Day” PRESENTED ID 23-1501 Fresno Animal Center presents “Pet of the Month” PRESENTED COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS Councilmember Karbassi Reports and Comments: Requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Roselyn 'Roz' Clark, co-founder of Fresno's Neighborhood Watch. Councilmember Arias Reports and Comments: Acknowledged staff and announced the new dog park and the upcoming naming of the park. Announced on November 4, 2023, there will be a bike and helmet giveaway in Tower District at 11:00 a.m. in partnership with the Fresno County Bike Coalition. Acknowledged staff for their weekly cleanup efforts in Chinatown. Acknowledged staff for the progress on the water tower improvements and preserving it as a historic asset. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 3 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Councilmember Chavez Reports and Comments: Acknowledged the Fresno Fair's successful event. Toured Fresno Unified's new Farber Educational Complex and acknowledged staff for installing a crosswalk light on the corner, which will improve safety for families and children traveling to and from the school. Requested the meeting adjourn in memory of Roselyn 'Roz' Clark, Dr. Alfred Valles, and his wife Selina Valles. Councilmember Bredefeld Reports and Comments: Mentioned the District 6 community meeting was held and acknowledged city staff members for attending the meeting. Councilmember Esparza Reports and Comments: Announced and acknowledged staff for the kickoff of the fall season of town hall meeting. Attended the ribbon-cutting event for Webster Park in the Webster Elementary neighborhood. Announced the upcoming “Trunk or Treat” event at Manchester Center on Saturday, October 21, 2023, from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Announced the Taco Truck Throwdown event at Chukchansi Park on Saturday, October 21, 2023. Vice President Perea Reports and Comments: Acknowledged the Fresno Arts Council and Lilia Chavez for partnering on the repainting of two crosswalks. Congratulated the firefighters and employees who recently celebrated awards and promotions. Gave appreciation to the ISD Department for their great assistance. Acknowledged the Public Works teams for their regular presence in District 1 neighborhoods, leading to positive improvements. Participated in the "Firefighter for a Day" program offered by the Fresno Fire Department with plans to create a physical and mental challenge. Council President Maxwell Reports and Comments: Announced the upcoming third Annual Fall Fest in District 4 on Saturday, October 28, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. located at Large Park 4424 North Milbrook Avenue. MAYOR/MANAGER REPORTS AND COMMENTS City Manager White Reports and Comments: The following tray memos were provided to Council: Measure P Fiscal Year 2022 Annual Report, Fall Home and Garden Show event and discussed Planning and Development will be present to discuss Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUS). Acknowledged and announced the City of Fresno ISD was recognized as the recipient of the prestigious 2023 MISAC (Municipal Information Systems Association of City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 4 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes California) Excellence in Information Technology Practices Award. Gave an update to Council on the implementation of the Charter fence gate, to be in effect as of November 1, 2023. CITY CLERK AND CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS AND COMMENTS City Clerk Stermer Reports and Comments: Announced the need to fill a vacancy on the Civil Service Board and provided information on how to apply. Noted the deadline for voter registration for the March 5, 2024, presidential primary is February 20, 2024. Mentioned the availability of a candidate guidebook for those interested in running for local office. City Attorney Janz Reports and Comments: Provided an update on the Waste Tire Amnesty event in District 7, where 877 waste tires were collected. Gave special thanks to code enforcement, specifically the Legal Dumping Task Force, for their efforts. UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION Upon call, the following members of the public addressed Council: Fernardo Elizando; Steve Diddy; Jennifer McElland (10:05 a.m.); Robert McCloskey (1-D); Matthew Gillian (1-D); Linda Tubach; Lisa Flores; Rebekah Shannon; Brandi Nuse-Villegas; Daisy; Lethal Garcia, and Scott Oldenburg. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Karbassi, the CONSENT CALENDAR was hereby adopted by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - 1.-A.ID 23-1507 Approval of Minutes for September 28, 2023, Regular Meeting, October 5, 2023, Regular Meeting, and October 5, 2023, Special Meeting. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-C.ID 23-1424 Approve first amendment to the consultant services agreement with RS&H California, Inc., to provide professional airport planning and environmental consulting services to prepare and implement an Air Traffic Control Tower Replacement Work Plan for Fresno Yosemite International Airport in the amount of $329,179 (Council District 4). APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 5 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 1.-E.ID 23-1500 Actions pertaining to American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to the Valley Dream Center (VDC): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301/Class 1 for proposed project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2.Approve an agreement with VDC allocating $200,000 in ARPA funding for capital improvements to the Valley Dream Center ’s gymnasium located at 1835 N Winery Avenue. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-G.ID 23-1498 ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the 20th Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) 2023-185 appropriating $236,600 for the 2021 Assistance to Firefighters Grant for Firefighters Annual Physicals (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). RESOLUTION 2023-276 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-I.ID 23-1509 Approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Altec Industries, Inc. of Birmingham, Alabama, for the purchase of five Altec bucket trucks in the amount of $1,027,905 procured by means of a cooperative purchase agreement with Sourcewell, for the Department of Public Works and Department of Public Utilities. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-J.ID 23-1339 Approve the purchase of laptops, docking stations, and desktops from Dell Technologies (Dell) in an amount not to exceed $2,525,100, utilizing NASPO Contract MNWNC-108/7-15-70-34-003 for year two of the Citywide Computer Replacement Plan (Plan). APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-K.ID 23-1503 Approve Amendment 4 to the Software as a Service Agreement with Tyler Technologies, Inc. reallocating funds within the project from unspent Software as a Service (SaaS) fees. No additional funding is requested. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-M.ID 23-1525 ***RESOLUTION: Adopt the Fifth Amendment to Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183, amending Exhibit 3, Unit 3, Non-Supervisory White Collar (FCEA) by adding the new classification and providing a monthly salary step plan range for Animal Care Specialist I, Animal Care Specialist II, Senior Animal Care Specialist and Animal Services Representative I, Animal Services Representative II, City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 6 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Senior Animal Services Representative; and amending Exhibit 13-1, Unit 13, Exempt Supervisory and Professional (CFPEA) by adding the new classification and providing a salary step plan range for Animal Center Supervisor, effective October 23, 2023 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) City Clerk Stermer announced the following correction was made to the above item -correction to Exhibit 13-1, Unit 13, Exempt Supervisory and Professional (CFPEA) to update the Animal Center Supervisor monthly salary from $5,687 - $6,913 to $6,450 - $7,803 in the staff report, Resolution and Salary Tables. RESOLUTION 2023-278 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-N.ID 23-1369 Actions pertaining to the demolition of a city owned building located at 735-741 H Street, Fresno CA 93721- Parcel Number 467-040-23 (District 3). 1. ***RESOLUTION - Approve an Interfund Loan Agreement between the General Fund and the Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund. (Requires 5 Affirmative votes) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 2. ***RESOLUTION - Declaring an Urgent Necessity for the Preservation of Life, Health, Property; and Authorizing the Planning & Development Director or Designee to Enter Into and Administer Contracts for the Demolition of Dangerous Structures, and Removal of Hazardous Materials Without Advertised Competitive Bidding; and Approve the Following Contracts: David Knott Incorporated tor Demolition Services In An Amount Not To Exceed $589,972 And Centec Construction For The Removal Of Hazardous Materials in an Amount Not To Exceed $99,360; and Authorize the Planning & Development Director to Sign Such Contracts (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 3. **RESOLUTION - Adopt the 25TH Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2023-185 to appropriate $540,000.00 in the General Fund for demolition of a city owned building located at 735-741 H Street, Fresno, CA 93721 (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 4. Approve an agreement with JSA Environmental Consulting in the amount of $50,160.00 for remediation of any hazardous materials. RESOLUTION 2023-279 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2023-280 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2023-281 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 7 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 1.-P.ID 23-1523 Actions pertaining to a proposed permanent affordable housing project at 6507 North Polk Avenue, known as the Welcome Home Project (District 2): 1. ***RESOLUTION - Authorizing acceptance of Project Homekey 3 Funding from the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development for the Welcome Home Project in the amount of $21,983,607 and authorizing the City Manager or designee to enter into and execute a standard agreement to secure the Homekey 3 funds and participate in the Homekey 3 Program (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 2. ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the 24th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2023-185 appropriating $21,983,700 to the Homekey Program fund for Fiscal Year 2023- 2024. (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 3. Approve a State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (part of the American Rescue Plan Act) Agreement with Valley Teen Ranch for development of the Welcome Home Project, in an amount not to exceed $2,800,000. 4. Approve a Memorandum of Understanding with Valley Teen Ranch related to the Welcome Home Project and the State of California Homekey 3 Program. Councilmember Karbassi acknowledged staff and highlighted the importance of accepting $23 million in state funds for the project and acknowledged the community's feedback on parking, traffic patterns, and infrastructure needs. RESOLUTION 2023-282 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2023-283 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-Q.ID 23-1443 Actions pertaining to Woodward Tot Lot and ADA Accessibility Improvements (Council District 6): 1. Reject the bid received and direct staff to re-bid the project (Bid File 12400255). 2. Approve the First Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with Quad Knopf, Inc, dba QK, in the amount not to exceed $7,500, for a total increased contract amount not to exceed $57,200, for professional support services to re-bid the project. Vice President Perea recused herself from the above item. The item was approved 6-0 by the following vote: Ayes (6): Karbassi, Arias, Chavez, Bredefeld, Esparza, Maxwell City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 8 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Recused (1): Perea APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-S.ID 23-1469 Actions pertaining to the Friant Road Southbound Right Turn Lane Extension at Audubon Drive (Bid File 12303030) (Council District 6): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff ’s determination pursuant to Section 15301/Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $697,625 to Avison Construction, Inc., Madera, California. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-T.ID 23-1473 Actions pertaining to the Tulare Complete Streets Project from 6th Street to Cedar Avenue (Bid File No. 12300027) (Council Districts 5 and 7): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301/Class 1 (Existing Facilities ), 15303/Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures ), and 15304/Class 4 (Minor Alterations to Land) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $2,339,250 to Agee Construction Corporation of Clovis, California APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-U.ID 23-1474 Approve an agreement for Professional Engineering Services with BKF Engineers, from Oakland, California in the amount of $149,773, with a $10,000 contingency, for the design and construction support services for the Shaw Avenue Roadway Improvements Project between Fruit Avenue and Palm Avenue (Council District 1 and 2). APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-V.ID 23-1516 Actions pertaining to the Audubon Drive and Del Mar Avenue Traffic Signal Installation (Bid File No. 12302647) (Council District 2): 1.RESOLUTION - adopting findings pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines sections 15091 and 15093 as required by CEQA guidelines section 15096 for the River West Eaton Trail Extension Project. 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $1,016,680 to American Paving Company, of Fresno, California. RESOLUTION 2023-284 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-X.ID 23-1491 Approve the Fourth Amendment to the consultant services agreement with Water Systems Consulting, Inc ., to extend the term of the contract City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 9 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes to December 31, 2026, for the development of the Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan, Programmatic Environmental Impact Report and 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (Citywide). APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-Y.ID 23-1496 Approve the Third Amendment to the consultant services agreement with CDM Smith, Inc., to expand the scope of services, extend the agreement to June 30, 2025, and increase the contract amount by $644,753 for a total amount of $1,390,403 for Groundwater and Landfill Remediation Services at the City of Fresno Sanitary Landfill (Council District 3). APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-Z.ID 23-1497 Approve the First Amendment to the consultant services agreement with NBS Government Finance Group, to extend the term of the agreement to December 27, 2024, for the previously approved contract in the amount of $139,689 for the Study for Various Utility Connection and Capacity Fees. (Citywide) APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-AA.ID 23-1366 RESOLUTION - Dedicating a portion of City-owned property for public street purposes to accommodate the construction of a public driveway approach to the new South Peach Park on the easterly side of Peach Avenue (Council District 5). RESOLUTION 2023-285 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-BB.ID 23-1449 RESOLUTION - Of Intention to Annex Final Tract Map Number 6269 as Annexation Number 147 to the City of Fresno Community Facilities District Number 11 and to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes; and setting the public hearing for Thursday, December 7, 2023, at 10:00 am (located on the southwest corner of North Willow Avenue and North Alicante Drive) (Council District 6). RESOLUTION 2023-286 ADOPTED APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-CC.ID 23-1451 Actions related to the award of a Maintenance Agreement with DILAX Systems US Inc., in the amount of $228,855.00: 1. Affirm the City Manager's determination that DILAX Systems, Inc., is uniquely qualified to perform maintenance services for the Department of Transportation, FAX Division, on the Automatic Passenger Counter system (APC). 2. Affirm the City Manager’s determination that DILAX Systems, City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 10 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Inc., is uniquely capable as defined by the Federal Transit Administration for sole source non -competitive procurements, to perform software maintenance services for the Department of Transportation. 3.Award a three (3) year contract with two (2) 1-year optional extensions for an Annual Hardware and Software Maintenance Agreement as part of the Automatic Passenger Counters (APC) Project to DILAX Systems US Inc., in the amount of $228,855.00. 4.Authorize the Director of Transportation or designee to execute all related documents. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-DD.ID 23-1455 Approve the award of Product Requirements Contract 12400064 for Fresno Area Express Fare Media for two years with four optional one-year extensions to EDM Technology, Inc. (Bid File 12400064). Purchases made by the City of Fresno Department of Transportation shall not exceed $338,528.74 during the initial two-year contract period. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-EE.ID 23-1524 Approve the reappointment of James S. Kitch and Myra N. Coble to the Tower District Specific Plan Implementation Committee for a term which serves at the pleasure of the Councilmember. APPROVED ON CONSENT CALENDAR CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 1.-B.ID 23-1511 Approve the appointment of Chenier Derrick to the Disability Advisory Commission for a term ending June 30, 2024. Approve the appointment of Kurt Madden to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board for a term ending November 1, 2025. Approve the reappointments of Edgar Blunt, Scott Miller, and Terry Metters Jr. to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board for terms ending November 1, 2025. Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent to discuss the vacancy in the Planning Commission and requested a legal memo on how long a vacancy can remain expired before action is required. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Vice President Perea, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 11 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 1.-D.ID 23-1379 Actions pertaining to the rebudget of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) grant funding within various Departments: 1.***RESOLUTION - Adopting the 18th Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2023-185 to reclassify $14,915,600 and appropriate $419,200 in various department budgets within the ARPA fund (citywide) (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent for further discussion. Upon call, there was no staff presentation and no council discussion. RESOLUTION 2023-274 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Action Item be ADOPTED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld6 - Absent:Karbassi1 - 1.-F.ID 23-1484 Actions pertaining to the Fresno Fire Department’s Firefighting Turnouts: 1.Award a three (3) year sole source contract, not to exceed $2,700,000 to LN Curtis (Curtis Tools for Heroes) for the purchase of Globe firefighting turnouts as a sole -source provider based on unique features only available with Globe turnouts. 2.*** RESOLUTION - Adopt Resolution authorizing the Fire Department Chief or designee to enter into a three (3) year contract with Curtis Tools for Heroes without advertised competitive bidding. (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent to discuss the existing equipment being replaced. RESOLUTION 2023-275 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Bredefeld, that the above Action Item be ADOPTED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld6 - Absent:Karbassi1 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 12 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes 1.-H.ID 23-1482 Actions pertaining to the award of a construction contract for the City Hall North and South Parking Lot Security Camera project adding a total of 40 security cameras to the North and South parking lots (Bid File 12302202) (District 3): 1.Adopt finding of a Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(f) Existing Facilities of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 2.Award a construction contract to Alpha Omega Data Solutions of Los Banos, California, for $440,625 for the construction of the City Hall North and South Parking Lot Security Camera project. 3.Authorize the Director of General Services or designee to execute all related documents. Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent for further discussion. Upon call, there was no staff presentation and no council discussion. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Bredefeld, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - 1.-L.ID 23-1466 Actions pertaining to the FY24 Position Authorization Resolution No. 2023-184: 1: ***RESOLUTION - Adopt the 5th Amendment to Position Authorization Resolution (PAR) No. 2023-184, adding three (3) full-time positions in the Public Works Department (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). Council President Maxwell moved this item to Contested Consent to discuss project delays in district 4. Council discussion on this item included: concerns regarding the timely delivery of Public Works projects and the prioritization of neighborhood improvements, the challenges posed by increased funding and projects and the needs for innovative delivery models. RESOLUTION 2023-277 ADOPTED On motion of Council President Maxwell, seconded by Vice President Perea, that the above Action Item be ADOPTED. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 13 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - 1.-O.ID 23-1485 Action pertaining to homeless youth services agreement provided under the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program (Bid File 12400090): 1.Approve an Agreement for one -year with one optional one-year extension with Fresno County Economic Opportunities Commission to provide homeless youth bridge housing services in the annual amount of $139,429.00. Councilmember Chavez moved this item to Contested Consent to get clarification regarding the funding and the services provided for homeless youth. Council discussion on this item included: funding for bridge housing beds aimed at supporting homeless youth between the ages of 18 to 24; the utilization of the sanctuary shelter and the reason behind its closure, and how referrals to these services work. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Chavez, seconded by Councilmember Karbassi, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias and Chavez6 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - 1.-R.ID 23-1483 Award a construction contract for the Base Bid plus all eight (8) Add Alternates in the total amount of $8,646,293 to Avison Construction, Inc of Madera, CA, as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Park at MLK Magnet Core Project (Bid File No. 12302905) (Council District 3). Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent to discuss the construction schedule. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias and Chavez6 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 14 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Absent:Bredefeld1 - 1.-W.ID 23-1490 Award a requirements contract to ScrubCan Inc ., a California corporation, to provide janitorial services at Department of Public Utilities facilities for an amount not to exceed $499,824 per year for one year with an optional one-year extension, plus annual Consumer Price Index adjustments (Bid File 12301773) (Council Districts 3, 4, 6, and 7). Councilmember Arias moved this item to Contested Consent to discuss the lowest bidder. Council discussion on this item included: the reasons behind not selecting the lowest bidder and the evaluation criteria used in the vendor selection process, prevailing wage, union status, job classifications. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - 2. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS 10:00 A.M. ID 23-1460 Actions pertaining to the acquisition of a permanent street easement and right of way to benefit the Tract 6162 Development Project for the widening of West Ashlan Avenue between North Polk Avenue and North Hayes Avenue (Council District 1): 1.HEARING to consider a resolution of public use and necessity for acquisition of a permanent street easement and right of way for public street purposes over, under, through and across a portion of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 511-040-06, owned by Elvia Gonzalez, for the construction of the widening of West Ashlan Avenue between North Polk Avenue and North Hayes Avenue. 2.***RESOLUTION - Determining that public interest and necessity require acquisition of a permanent easement and rights of way for public street purposes over, under, through and across portions of APN 511-040-06, owned by Elvia Gonzalez, a married woman as her sole and separate property for the construction of the widening of West Ashlan Avenue between City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 15 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes North Polk Avenue and North Hayes Avenue and authorizing eminent domain proceedings for public use and purpose (Requires 5 Affirmative Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). The above hearing was called to order at 10:07 a.m. Upon call, there was no public comment, no staff presentation, and no council discussion. The public comment period closed at 10:10 a.m. RESOLUTION 2023-287 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Vice President Perea, that the above Action Item be ADOPTED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea, Karbassi, Arias, Chavez and Bredefeld 7 - 10:05 A.M. ID 23-1470 HEARING to consider Conditional Use Permit Application P 22-03146 and related Environmental Assessment P 22-03146 pertaining to ±1.38 acres of property located on the south side of West Bullard Avenue, between North Van Ness Boulevard and North Forkner Avenue (Council District 2) - Planning & Development Department. 1.DENY the appeal and ADOPT Environmental Assessment P 22- 03146, dated May 24, 2023, a determination of Categorical Exemption, Section 15332/Class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and, 2.DENY the appeals and UPHOLD the action of the Planning Commission and Planning and Development Department Director to approve Conditional Use Permit Application P 22-03146, authorizing the adaptive reuse of an existing residence to be used as a new residential respiratory care facility (congregate living health facility), subject to compliance with the Conditions of Approval dated September 6, 2023. Councilmember Chavez and Councilmember Bredefeld recused themselves from the above item and was not a part of the discussion. Councilmember Karbassi informed the council of his reasons for abstaining from the discussion and vote. The above hearing was called to order at 10:10 a.m. and introduced to Council by Planning Manager Siegrist and Applicant Representative Brian Whelan, and CEQA Appellant Michael Patrick Durkee. Upon call, the following members of the public addressed Council in favor of City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 16 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes the project: Joel Campbell; Jennifer McElland, and Brandi Nuse-Villegas; Upon call, the following members of the public addressed Council in opposition of the project: Andrew Wanger; Robert Sullivan Jr.; Dr. Oliver Ezenwugo, and Brad Homen. The public hearing was closed at 10:56 a.m. Council discussion on this item included: the proposed welcome home project; the concerns regarding the project and the application of the California Environmental Quality Act, and the need for housing for the disabled. Councilmember Arias motioned to deny the appeals and uphold the original conditional use permit, allowing the project to proceed. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Esparza. On motion of Councilmember Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Action Item be APPROVED. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Esparza, Maxwell, Perea and Arias4 - Recused:Chavez and Bredefeld2 - Abstain:Karbassi1 - 10:10 A.M. ID 23-1519 Appearance by Jamie Quezaza Jr. to discuss Fresno Police Department and their responsibilities (Resident District 1) DID NOT APPEAR 3. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 4. CITY COUNCIL 5. CLOSED SESSION During open session, City Attorney Janz announced the items that would be discussed in closed session. Council withdrew to closed session at 11:43 a.m. 5.-A.ID 23-1416 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 17 October 19, 2023City Council Meeting Minutes Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Veronica A. Flores v. City of Fresno, et al.; Fresno Superior Court Case No.: 20CECG01711 The above item was discussed in closed session. There were no open session announcements regarding this item. DISCUSSED 5.-B.ID 23-1529 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case name: 1 Community Compact v. City of Fresno, Fresno Superior Court Case No. 23CECG02740 The above item was removed from the agenda by staff with no return date. ADJOURNMENT City Council adjourned from Closed Session at 12:13 a.m. in memory of Roselyn 'Roz' Clark, Dr. Alfred Valles, and his wife Selina Valles. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 18 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department BY:SARAH GAYTAN, Program Manager Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant guidelines. RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting the Fresno City Council approve the grant guidelines established by the Fresno Arts Council in partnership with Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission). This request is in accordance with the Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) between the Fresno Arts Council and the City of Fresno, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax (Measure P) allocates 12% of funds collected for competitive grants aiding nonprofit organizations to expand access to arts and culture. The grant guidelines prepared by the Commission and Fresno Arts Council are now presented to City Council for consideration and adoption. BACKGROUND In 2018, a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. In accordance with the Agreement dated August 10, 2023, Fresno Arts Council developed written grant guidelines to make grant awards. The Agreement requires the grant guidelines to be consistent with the priorities, recommendations, and strategies identified in the City adopted Cultural Arts Plan and the requirements outlined in the Measure P Ordinance. Grant guidelines shall include all information necessary to ensure a transparent process, including, but not limited to scoring criteria, eligible scoring committee members, process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MA/NE 6-0 MOVED TO 11/16/2023 TM ABSENT NEW FILE ID 23-1642 File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. eligible scoring committee members,process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, priority funding categories,expenditure delivery deadlines,and risk assessments.Grants funded shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council or its successor local arts agency. The Commission provided input on the grant guidelines prepared by the Fresno Arts Council and recommended the guidelines for adoption at their October 16, 2023, Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378,this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A- Does not apply to this action. FISCAL IMPACT Twelve percent (12%)of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 in Article 15 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants.Funding for the grant program and grant program administration is reflected in the FY 2024 PARCS budget and fully encumbered to the Fresno Arts Council consistent with the Agreement. Attachments: Resolution Project Specific Grant Guidelines General Operating Support Grant Guidelines City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 of 2 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ______ Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MEASURE P EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS AND CULTURE GRANT GUIDELINES WHEREAS, in 2018 a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P- the Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC); and WHEREAS, twelve percent (12%) of the funds from Measure P shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming; in accordance with FMC Section 7-1506(b)(4); and WHEREAS, the City of Fresno entered into an Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) with the Fresno Arts Council on August 10, 2023, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Art and Culture Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the Fresno Arts Council in collaboration with the Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission) have set forth competitive grant guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed and made recommendations for the City Council’s adoption of competitive grant program guidelines; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. Adopt the grant guidelines 2 of 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, TODD STERMER, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2023. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZ City Attorney By: Angela M. Karst Date Senior Deputy City Attorney Attachment: Grant Guidelines Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 1 of 23 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS AND CULTURE FUND FUNDED BY MEASURE P ADMINISTERED BY FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF FRESNO PARKS, ARTS, AND RECREATION COMMISSION (PRAC) PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANT GUIDELINES, 2024-25 DEADLINE: TO BE DETERMINED Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 2 of 23 TABLE OF CONTENTS FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL INFORMATION ...............................................................................................4 WHO WE ARE: ......................................................................................................................................4 CULTURAL ARTS GRANT OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................4 MEASURE P ..........................................................................................................................................4 CATEGORY 4, MEASURE P ORDINANCE .......................................................................................................5 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN .............................................................................................................................5 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN VISION .............................................................................................................................. 6 GOALS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES ......................................................................................................................... 6 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS & CULTURE FUND ...................................................................................7 PROJECT SPECIFIC 2024-2025 GRANT GUIDELINES ........................................................................................7 ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDING .........................................................................................................................7 INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 7 ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 7 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 8 TYPES OF GRANTS ..............................................................................................................................8 PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS .......................................................................................................................8 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT .................................................................................................................9 REQUEST AMOUNTS ........................................................................................................................ 10 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT AND PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS .............................................................. 10 FUNDING AMOUNTS ........................................................................................................................................ 10 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................................................................... 11 REQUIRED APPLICATION INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 12 NARRATIVE QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................... 12 Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 3 of 23 OVERVIEW OF APPLICATION PROCCESS AND REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 14 REQUIRED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE ................................................................................................ 14 ONLINE APPLICATION PROCESS ............................................................................................................... 15 ACCESSING ONLINE APPLICATION PLATFORM ............................................................................................... 15 ACCESSING THE APPLICATION ............................................................................................................................ 15 WEBINARS, WORKSHOPS, TECH SUPPORT, OFFICE HOURS ..................................................................................... 15 APPLICATION COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................... 15 APPLICATION REVIEW AND EVALUATION .......................................................................................... 18 ELIGIBILITY AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 18 PANEL ADJUDICATION AND RANKING .................................................................................................................. 18 GRANT PANEL REVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 18 PANELISTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 HOW SCORING WORKS: ................................................................................................................................... 18 ADJUDICATION PANEL RANKING......................................................................................................................... 19 GRANTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PRAC ............................................................................................................ 19 ANNOUNCE INTENT TO AWARD ......................................................................................................................... 19 GRANTS AWARDED .......................................................................................................................................... 19 APPEALS ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 SELECTED GRANTEE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................ 20 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................. 22 Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 4 of 23 FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL INFORMATION WHO WE ARE: The Fresno Arts Council (FAC) is the state-local partner to the California Arts Council, designated by Resolution of the County Board of Supervisors to serve as the County’s arts agency. It is designated as the City of Fresno’s arts agency by Memorandum of Understanding. As the local arts agency, the FAC provides financial support, services, and other programs to a variety of cultural arts organizations, individual artists, and diverse communities throughout Fresno County. Our mission is to enrich people’s lives through the arts, and our purpose is to foster an arts community that recognizes and honors the contributions of its citizens to the arts. We are managed by a volunteer board of directors, and our agency solicits financial support from foundations, membership dues, and government and corporate funders, as well as private donors. The Fresno Arts Council (FAC) will award grants generated by the Measure P sales tax to nonprofit community-based organizations for the purpose of increasing access to the Arts in the City of Fresno. Contact Information: Please direct questions regarding Operating Grant Guidelines to Lilia Gonzáles Chávez, Executive Director, at lilia@fresnoartscouncil.org or [Grants Manager] at [email]. CULTURAL ARTS GRANT OVERVIEW MEASURE P In 2018, City of Fresno residents voted to approve Measure P, also known as the FRESNO CLEAN AND SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX, a three-eighths (.0375) percent sales tax ordinance, dedicated to improving parks, arts, and recreation facilities, services, and access in the City of Fresno. Funds collected by the sales tax can be used for purposes including, but not limited to, clean and safe parks; new parks and recreation facilities; youth and senio r recreation and after-school facilities and job training; improved walking and biking trails; the San Joaquin River Parkway; beautification of streets; and expanded access to arts and culture. Measure P is a renewable thirty - year initiative implemented by the City of Fresno with oversight by the Parks, Recreation, and Arts Commission (PRAC), a nine member committee established by the ordinance, with Mayoral appointments. Twelve Percent (12%) of funds collected by the sales tax are designated for improving access to arts and culture via competitive grants for cultural arts nonprofit organizations within City limits. T his process is discussed in category 4 of the ordinance. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 5 of 23 CATEGORY 4, MEASURE P ORDINANCE Fresno Municipal Code Section 7-1506(b) (4) Expanded Access to Arts and Culture. (A) Twelve percent (12%) percent of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. (B) Grants funded pursuant to this paragraph shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council, or its successor local arts agency, using multiple solicitations that allow for a diverse set of programs, with different program sizes and reach, including core operating and project-support grants, to be funded. The Commission shall ensure that grant applications are reviewed in a transparent, competitive process. (C) Prior to the implementation of subparagraph (B), the Commission shall work in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council, and local arts and cultural stakeholders, to develop a Cultural Arts Plan for the City of Fresno that would identify needs in the arts and cultural community; prioritize outcomes and investments; and develop a vision and goals for the future of Fresno arts and cultural programs that are reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno. This process shall include a robust community engagement process, including multiple public meetings. The Cultural Arts Plan shall be updated every five years by the Commission. (D) Funding for operating support distributed pursuant to this paragraph shall support organizational stability for arts and cultural organizations that reflect the cultural, geographic and demographic diversity of the City of Fresno; and reflect the proportion of each grantee's overall operations that serves residents within, or visitors to, the City of Fresno sphere of influence. (E) Grants funded pursuant to subparagraph (B) shall prioritize organizations and programs that support and expand diverse public or youth engagement and equity. CULTURAL ARTS PLAN Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan [link] was developed through a year-long process involving robust community participation. A partnership between a consultant group, Network for Culture and Arts Policy (NCAP), the City of Fresno PARCS Department, Fresno Arts Council, and the Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (PRAC), with multiple opportunities for public surveys, meetings, and draft comments, individual interviews with community arts stakeholders, and research into Fresno’s cultural arts assets and needs, ultimately led to the approval and adoption of Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan, which must be reassessed and updated every five years, according to requirements set forth in the ordinance. The Cultural Arts Plan was adopted by the Fresno City Council on August 10, 2023. Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan identifies the following goals, with associated strategies, in addition to defining funding priorities. These goals and funding priorities informed the development of Cultural Arts Grant Programs, managed by the Fresno Arts Council with stakeholder input and PRAC involvement and oversight. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 6 of 23 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN VISION Cultural arts in Fresno will be recognized, prioritized, inclusive, accessible, and continue to reflect, celebrate, and connect the community. GOALS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES (see [link] for recommendations, strategies, and funding priorities): I. GRANT-MAKING & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Desired Outcome: Establish a strong foundation to support and expand access to arts and culture through grant-making and community engagement. II. STABILIZE, RESTORE & ACTIVATE Desired Outcome: Cultural arts organizations and assets will be stabilized, restored and activated to expand access to arts and culture. III. EDUCATION & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Desired Outcome: Expand access to a variety of arts and cultural education programs to provide educational opportunities for people of all ages. Desired Outcome: Equip artists, cultural practitioners and organizations with the skills and organizational resources to stabilize and expand operations. IV. CELEBRATE & ENHANCE Desired Outcome: Elevate and celebrate arts and culture to strengthen a sense of community. V. ADDRESS BARRIERS, INNOVATE & EXPAND Desired Outcome: Expand access to arts and culture by eliminating barriers and investing in innovation. VI. MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS & POLICIES TO SUPPORT CULTURAL ARTS Desired Outcome: Establish a strong foundation to support and expand access to arts and culture through policy planning and municipal investment. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 7 of 23 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS & CULTURE FUND PROJECT SPECIFIC 2024 -2025 GRANT GUIDELINES Deadline: To be determined Grant Awards: $2,000 to $200,000 Grant Activity Period: To be determined ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDING INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS • Organizations that do not have their principal place of business in the City of Fresno. • Organizations whose primary mission is to raise funds. • Organizations whose primary function is regranting. • K-12 Schools • County Offices of Education • Public and Private Colleges and Universities • Government agencies and departments that have a line item in the City of Fresno Budget. • Organizations that do not serve the public and/ or provide public programing. • Individuals who are not working with an eligible incorporated 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor; grant applicants with a fiscal sponsor are eligible for a Project Specific Grant but are ineligible for an Operating Support Grant. ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS • Nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. • 501(c)(3) Organizations or Project Specific Grant applicants with an eligible Fiscal Sponsor. Applicants using fiscal sponsors - An Applicant that is without its own organizational nonprofit status must use a Fresno-based fiscal sponsor organization with a federal 501(c)(3) designation, and has experience supporting and expanding access to arts and cultural programming, to apply for funding that supports and expands access to arts and cultural programming. Types of applicant organizations eligible to apply using a fiscal sponsor include, but are not limited to, individual artists and culture bearers, artist collectives and cultural collectives, and other unincorporated art and culture guilds or associations. An Applicant’s Fiscal sponsors must demonstrate at least two (2) years of arts and culture programming and service as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization; for Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grant Applicants, the fiscally sponsored applicant or newly formed 501(c)(3) organization is not required to Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 8 of 23 have its own two-year history of art and culture operational and financial experience at the time of application submission. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS • City of Fresno-based: documentation of being a Fresno-based nonprofit organization that supports and expands access to arts and cultural programing, or nonprofit social service organization with regular ongoing arts programming and/or services and a principal place of business in the City of Fresno. • Certificate of good standing: Nonprofit organizations and fiscal sponsors (if applicable) must have “active status” with the California Secretary of State (SOS) showing evidence of “good standing “at the time of application. o Organizations must also be in good standing with the Office of the Attorney General of California or provide an adequate letter of explanation regarding registration status. o The organization must operate and offer its programs in a nondiscriminatory manner and in compliance with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, laws protecting persons with disabilities. • Letter of agreement: If using a Nonprofit Fiscal Sponsor, the Fiscal Sponsor must provide a letter of agreement acknowledging the fiscal sponsorship with the project applicant and submit the letter with the application. If the grant is awarded the fiscal sponsor becomes the legal contract holder with the Fresno Arts Council. Once a contract is awarded the fiscal sponsor cannot be changed. TYPES OF GRANTS PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS Deadline: TBD Grant Awards: $2,000 to $200,000 Grant Activity Period: TBD Project Specific Grants will be made to support specific projects that respond to the goals of the Cultural Plan. Project Specific Grants can be used to pay artists’ fees, acquire project-specific supplies and materials, or acquire equipment required to complete the project; venue, and technical costs are additional examples of allowable expenses. Guidelines and Application for Project Specific Grants can be accessed here: [link]. *Note: Future Grant Programs informed by the Cultural Arts Plan and future CAP revisions may be developed. Guidelines will be posted as new funding programs are offered. Please visit fresnoartscouncil.org for updates and information. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 9 of 23 • All Project Specific Grants must align with the goals and outcomes of the Cultural Arts Plan adopted by the Fresno City Council. • Project Specific Grants may go out multiple times a year and specify specific outcomes consistent with goals set in the Cultural Arts Plan. • Grants shall prioritize organizations and programs that support and expand diverse public or youth engagement and equity. • An independent 501(c)(3) Arts and Cultural organization is exempt from the two-year programing requirement, and two-year fiscal history, for Project Specific Grants only. • If applying with a Fiscal Sponsor, unless the applicant is being considered for an Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grant, the Fiscal Sponsor must have two years of activity of supporting and expanding access to arts and culture programing, and two years of financial history at the time of the application submission, to be eligible. o NOTE: In all cases, fiscal sponsors for Project Specific Grant applicants must be nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. • For any projects that will be permanently installed in a public or private space, a maintenance plan will be required. Grant applicants are advised to consider and adhere to site control requirements for both public and private facilities not under their ownership. Additionally, they should be mindful of obtaining any required permits or approvals for projects or programs conducted within the City of Fresno's right of way. • Project Specific Grants which may include festivals in parks or streets or the use of other City owned property (city building, right of way language) must first complete the following: (eligibility form/city review) • Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants are available to eligible Project Specific Grant applicants who do not have two years of fiscal history and/or two years of prior activity supporting and expanding access to arts and culture programming, at the time of application submission. o Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants will not exceed $50,000 each— prioritizing investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno, supporting and expanding diverse public or youth engagement, and equity. GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT General Operating Support was called out in the Ordinance to support organizational stability for arts and cultural organizations that reflect the cultural, geographic, and demographic diversity of the City of Fresno; and reflect the proportion of each grantee’s overall operations that serves residents within, or visitors to, the City of Fresno’s sphere of influence. Grants shall prioritize organizations and programs that support and expand diverse public or youth engagement and equity. General Operating Support Grants are intended to provide core support to Cultural Arts Organizations to sustain and increase community access to a broad and diverse range of opportunities in the arts. The General Operating Support grant provides direct funding for ongoing operations. This grant contributes Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 10 of 23 to a robust and diverse arts workforce and infrastructure. Funds may be used to support any eligible expenses associated with the general operations of Cultural Arts Organizations, including but not limited to rent, utilities, and staff salaries. REQUEST AMOUNTS GENERAL O PERATING SUPPORT AND PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS FUNDING AMOUNTS Each grant application funding cycle, available funding will be allocated approximately 50/50 between the two types of grants (all contemplated allocations may be adjusted in response to community need and interest; actual awards will also be affected by application quality as related to applicable scoring criteria). Project Specific Grants (this document) Other Project Specific Grants – Approximately 40% of available funding Project specific grants are available to nonprofit arts and culture organizations, nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming, and Projects under an eligible Fiscal Sponsor; may apply for projects between $2,000 and $200,000. Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants – Approximately 10% of available funding Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants are available to eligible Project Specific Grant applicants who do not have two years of fiscal history and/or two years of prior activity supporting and expanding access to arts and culture programming, at the time of application submission. Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants will not exceed $50,000 each—prioritizing investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno, supporting and expanding diverse public or youth engagement, and equity. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 11 of 23 General Operating Support Grants (see [link]) Other Operating Support - Approximately 40% of available funding Applicants limited to nonprofit arts and cultural organizations; may apply for: Budget Category Annual income as reported to the IRS Anticipated % of funding eligible for 1 Less than $250,000 Up to 70% 2 $251,000 and above Up to 30% capped at $300,000 Applicants who qualify as an Emerging Arts and Culture Organization, as defined below, shall first be reviewed for that tier of award. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants – Approximately 10% of available funding Applicants are limited to nonprofit arts and cultural organizations with annual revenue less than $50,000, regardless of years of operation; may apply for support of up to 100% of their annual revenue Emerging Arts and Culture Organizations are encouraged to apply for Operating Support Grants that build capacity and expand their ability to reach and serve residents and visitors in the City of Fresno. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants prioritize investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno. Distribution is dependent on available funds annually. FUNDING RESTRICTIONS Matching funds: are not required. Applicants must apply for the funding category that applies to them. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 12 of 23 REQUIRED APPLICATION INFORMATION NARRATIVE QUESTIONS All questions should provide the reviewer with information that helps them best understand your organization. Word count is to provide enough space for you to respond as completely as possible. If you can provide enough information with fewer words, that will not be held against you. Emerging organizations should only answer questions 1, 4, 5, and 6 1) Project Description a. Please describe your proposed project. b. Who is the target audience anticipated for this project? How will you capture who participates (age, ethnicity, income level, geography, etc.)? c. How does your work align with Fresno’s Cultural Arts plan? d. Do you have a regular process for evaluating the quality and success of your projects? What community impact do you envision for this project. e. Upload a project Budget (a template is provided). 500-750 words 2) Programming Share what the review panel should know about the organization’s arts and cultural programs. Consider the following questions to help shape your narrative: a. What are the primary activities of the organization? Describe the major programs open to the public. b. Describe key exhibitors/presenters, artists, and other collaborators. c. Identify how you include individual artists in your work. d. Describe the process the organization employs to select or create artistic programming. e. If arts and culture are not the mission of the organization, describe your arts and cultural programming, and describe how it fits within your larger organizational work. 750 words Upload the following: a. List of arts and cultural activities FY 2022-23 (1 page PDF) b. List of arts and cultural activities FY 2023-24 (1 page PDF) Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 13 of 23 3) Cultural equity and inclusion statements and policy a. Does the organization have an equity statement or other formalized diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts? If so, please upload any relevant documentation. b. What are the organization’s perceived needs and or plans for increasing diversity in board, staff, programming, and audiences, over the next year? c. What barriers, if any, are you removing to make that possible? (Barriers may include, but are not limited to, physical ability, language, cultural norms, educational background, and economic resources.). 750 words Upload: 4) Organizational Challenges a. What do you identify as your greatest challenges? b. Describe how you will address these challenges. c. Describe how these grant funds would be used to address these challenges. d. What do you perceive as barriers to your organizations increasing access to arts and culture? 750 words 5) Proposed Impact and Outcomes (organizational and community) Consider the following: a. What work is the organization most proud of? b. What outcome are you envisioning from this project. c. How will your organization measure the impact of this award? 750 words 6) Governance and Administrative Structure a. Describe your governance structure, including board meeting frequency, and board committee structure. Upload a board roster, include members’ names, occupation if known, and any other demographic information that you would like considered. b. Describe your administrative structure, including administrative, program, or cultural and/or artistic staff. List primary staff names, titles, and duties. Provide brief bios for key staff and include years with the organization. 750 words Upload: Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 14 of 23 OVERV IEW OF APPLICATION PROCCESS AND REQUIREMENTS Calendar and Timeline (Specific dates to be determined) Grants are accepted annually. Guidelines and Application Available November [X], 2023 Webinars and Office Hours Workshop webinars and office hours will be offered throughout the month of November 2023. Check [link] for full schedule. Open Application Period November X, 2023-January X, 2024 Staff Eligibility Review Winter 2023-24 Panel Review February-March 2024 PRAC Commission Review and Adopts Recommendations Spring 2024 Notifications Sent via Email Spring 2024 Awards Disbursed Spring 2024 Grant Period TBD REQUIRED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE Minimum Standards of Practice for All Organizations or Fiscal Sponsors: • General Liability insurance • Workman’s Compensation insurance (provide basis for exemption if applicable) • Current practice of annual Year-End Financial Review completed by an external Certified Public Accountant/Firm for organizations with a budget of $2 million and above. • The applicant organization must have a functioning Board of Directors that meets regularly. • Applicants using a fiscal sponsor must demonstrate that the fiscal sponsor can meet these requirements. • Additional data/demographic requirements from City of Fresno. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 15 of 23 ONLINE APPLICATION PROCESS ACCESSING ONLINE APPLICATION PLATFORM Fresno Arts Council uses Submittable to accept and manage grant request applications. You will need to create organizational/user accounts and profiles. Access the online application portal at https://fresnoartscouncil.submittable.com . Application Instructions are available [here]. For questions, please contact Fresno Arts Council at 559-237-9734 or email [grants email]. Fresno Arts Council encourages you to attend webinars, office hours, and make use of instructional resources early in your application process. FAC strongly recommends submitting the application and required supporting materials at least five (5) business days before the deadline to provide time to troubleshoot any technical issues. The deadline to submit the online grant applications will be on [TBD]. To ensure that organizations have enough time to prepare, the grant guidelines and application will be posted, and the application will open for a minimum of 60 days. ACCESSING THE APPLICATION Read the Application Instructions prior to completing an application. You do not have to complete and submit the application in one sitting; you may save and return to it as many times as you like. WEBINARS, WORKSHOPS, TECH SUPPORT, OFFICE HOURS All organizations that are considering applying for a grant are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to attend the pre-application workshop(s) offered by FAC. At the workshops, staff will review the guidelines and demonstrate Submittable, FAC’s online grant application system. Applicants are also encouraged to consult with the program staff well in advance of the application deadline if they have any questions about program requirements. In person and virtual office hours will be posted on [link]. Webinar Schedule: In person workshop: Office Hours Schedule: FAQs: [link/PDF] Email Support: For technical assistance and grant guideline questions, please call 559-237-9734 Monday through Friday, between the hours of 9:00AM and 3:00PM. You may also email X at [email]. Please allow at 24-48 hours for staff response. APPLICATION COMPONENTS A. Eligibility Check list: [link to application system] Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 16 of 23 B. Applicant Information • Legal Name of Organization/Applicant (and Fiscal Sponsor, if applicable) • DBA Name of Organization/Applicant, if applicable • Founding Date: Enter the year your organization was founded or began activity • Address: PDF proof of address upload • Fresno City Council District where Organization/Applicant is located (link to finder tool) • Organization/Applicant Phone • Primary Contact Name, title, email, phone • Organization/Applicant Website • Type of organization (drop-down menu? 501(c)(3); fiscally sponsored) • Organization or Fiscal Sponsor EIN number • Which month and day does your organization’s or Fiscal Sponsor’s fiscal year end? • Primary Discipline? (drop-down menu) • Organization Mission/Purpose: Enter your organization’s mission statement, or primary purpose. Your mission statement should be concise. Do not add program details here. • Has your organization, or your Fiscal Sponsor, conducted a majority of its cultural arts programming within the City of Fresno for the past two years preceding this application? C. Annual Operating Income D. For Project Specific Grants which may include festivals in parks or streets, or the use of other City owned property [city building right of way language], they must first complete the following: [eligibility form/city review] E. Required Financial Forms and/or Reports: All attachments must be in PDF format, with exception of Supporting Material(s) and Work Samples. For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of $50,000 or less: • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990, 990EZ or 990N For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of between $50,000 and $200,000 • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990 or 990EZ • Accountant reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year OR if this financial report is not yet available, a letter from the CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of $200,000 or more • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990 • Independent Financial Audit (for organizations with a budget of $2 million or more) or reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year; OR if this Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 17 of 23 financial report is not yet available, a letter from the CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For fiscally sponsored projects: • Sponsor organization’s IRS Designation Letter • Sponsor organization’s Federal Form 990 • A signed letter of agreement between the fiscal sponsor and the project applicant outlining the terms of the agreement and services • If the sponsor’s budget exceeds $2 million, An Independent Financial Audit OR letter from CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For sponsors with a budget between $200,000 and $1,999,999, submit a CPA-reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year. F. Proposed Grants Budget Please complete this budget template [link] G. Work Samples You are required to submit at least one work sample that exemplifies the cultural and/or artistic programs or events presented by your organization. This may include video or audio recordings, or digital images of performances, exhibitions, or events. Select the type of work sample that is most relevant to your organization. Maximum of 6 work samples accepted. H. Supporting Documents You may upload or provide links for up to three supporting documents from the past five years that demonstrate the impact of your programs on viewers/participants. Examples include: letters of support, participant testimonials, reviews, audience surveys, social media posts. This section is OPTIONAL, however you are strongly encouraged to submit at least one document. These documents help reviewers understand the impact of your programs on participants and audience members. Note: You may upload a document or provide links. You may provide a title and brief description for necessary context. 3 documents maximum. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 18 of 23 APPLICATION REVIEW AND EVALUATION ELIGIBILITY AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW Once the application window closes, Fresno Arts Council staff will review applications for eligibility and completeness. Once an application has been submitted, it cannot be reopened, revised, or resubmitted. Applications that pass this initial review will then be evaluated for their strengths by a separate Grant Review Panel, which will rely substantially on the information provided in the application and supporting materials submitted by applicants. PANEL ADJUDICATION AND RANKING An adjudication panel will be established that includes community members, artists and cultural bearer, and arts and culture administrators. The Commission shall ensure that grant applications are reviewed in a transparent, competitive process. GRANT PANEL REVIEW The adjudication panel is comprised mainly of individuals with substantial background in arts and culture, usually drawn from the ranks of experienced and skilled arts and culture practitioners, administrators, managers and board members of City of Fresno arts and cultural organizations, the Cultural Arts Subcommittee or other applicable PRAC subcommittee, and experienced arts and culture grant-makers from philanthropic and public sectors. PANELISTS A call for panelists will come out at the same time as the Request for Proposal. A list of eligible panelists will be submitted to the PRAC prior to the start of the adjudication process. Panelists will be required to declare any possible conflict of interest at the time of application. Declaration of Conflict of Interest form is included here as an attachment. Panelists may not be on the board or staff of any applicant for that grant cycle, nor related by blood or marriage to any applicant in that grant cycle. HOW SCORING WORKS: Adjudication of applications is based on 6 weighted questions. 1) Project Description 10% 2) Programming 30% 3) Cultural equity and inclusion statements and policy 20% 4) Organizational Challenges 10% 5) Proposed Impact and Outcomes (organizational and community) 20% Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 19 of 23 6) Governance and Administrative Structure 10% Scores for each assessment category are collected from individual panelists. Each organization’s category scores, and cumulative total are reported back to them during the award notifications process. ADJUDICATION PANEL RANKING Rank Rank Description 6 - Exemplary Overwhelmingly achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to the highest degree 5 - Strong Strongly achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to a significant degree 4 - Good Sufficiently achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to some degree 3 - Fair Moderately achieves the purpose of the program. Meets most of the review criteria and project requirements 2 - Marginal Minimally achieves the purpose of the program. Meets some of the review criteria and project requirements 1 - Weak Does not achieve the purpose of the program; proposals that are not appropriate for this grant category Inadequately meets the review criteria or project requirement GRANTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PRAC Following the Grant Panel Review process, Fresno Arts Council will submit grant application rankings and award recommendations to the Parks, Recreation, and Arts Commission (PRAC) for final acceptance. ANNOUNCE INTENT TO AWARD Once recommendations have been accepted by the PRAC, Fresno Arts Council will publish an intent to award a press release announcing grant recipients, funding amounts, and project descriptions. Anticipated TBA 2024. GRANTS AWARDED Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 20 of 23 [Grant year] Organizational General Operating Support funds will be awarded [insert date TBA] and disbursed [date/method] Project Specific Grant funds will be awarded [insert date TBA] and disbursed [date/method] APPEALS Any applicant not recommended to receive an award may submit a written appeal to Fresno Arts Council staff no later than 5:00 p.m. by the tenth calendar day following notification from staff to the applicant that no award is being recommended. Staff will review the appeal and present it to the PRAC subcommittee for review and recommendation. The PRAC will make the final ruling. Upon request from an appellant, staff will provide written comments submitted by the evaluation panels, to help the appellant prepare their response. SELECTED GRANTEE REQUIREMENTS The following are a list of additional requirements that will be included in the grantee agreement. Legal Requirements Insurance/endorsements Conflict of Interest disclosure statement Data Collection At a minimum, data collected shall include information needed to demonstrate compliance with Section 7-1506(b)(4)(D) such as: (a) Attendance data: (i) Number of youth participants served. Youth shall be defined as age seventeen (17) and younger. (ii) Number of adult participants served. Adult shall be defined as ages eighteen (18) through sixty-one (61). (iii) Number of senior participants served. Senior shall be defined as age sixty-two (62) and older. (b) Participant zip code data to identify the number and percentage of City of Fresno residents served. (c) race, ethnicity, household income and gender identity. (d) For murals only: total square feet installed and location/address. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 21 of 23 (e) Photos and/or videos highlighting grant funded projects, events, programs, etc. Vendors Tax Copyright Background Check/Mandated Reporter, etc. Invoicing for and receipt of grant payments Project amendments Credit/Recognition Grant recipients are required to acknowledge the support of the Measure P, Parks and Arts ordinance and Fresno Arts Council to demonstrate how City funds support arts and culture. Recipients receiving funds must use the required logos and credit line on all printed and electronic materials that advertise performances, exhibitions, or other public events throughout their work or, for those receiving operating support, throughout the grant period. The credit line and links to logos are listed below: • “This work [event, organization, project] is funded in part by the City of Fresno Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Fund through Fresno Arts Council.” • [Links to required logos] Cultural Arts Calendar Grantees must submit programming information and flyers to be included in the Cultural Arts Calendar at [link]. Reporting (midterm and final) 90% of grant funds will be awarded at the beginning of the grants cycle with the remaining 10% awarded when final reports are submitted. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 22 of 23 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Eligibility Checklist FAQs APPENDICES Measure P Ordinance Cultural Arts Plan DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH AN APPLICANT FOR FUNDING 1 Are you currently in litigation with a grant applicant or any of its agents? YES NO 2 Do you represent any firm, organization, or person who is in litigation with a grant applicant? YES NO 3 Do you currently represent or perform work for any clients? who do business with the Applicant? YES NO 4 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, owners or investors in a business which does business with a grant applicant, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Fresno? YES NO 5 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, related by blood or marriage to anyone applying for funds YES NO 6 Do you or any of your subcontractors have, or expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract in connection with the grant applicant? YES NO * If the answer to any question is yes, please explain here. Explanation: Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 23 of 23 Signature________________________________________Date__________________ (Print Name)______________________________________________________ (Company)_____________________________________________________________ (Address)______________________________________________________________ (City, State Zip)_________________________________________________________ Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 1 of 24 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS AND CULTURE FUND FUNDED BY MEASURE P ADMINISTERED BY FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF FRESNO PARKS, ARTS, AND RECREATION COMMISSION (PRAC) GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT GRANT GUIDELINES, 2024 -25 DEADLINE: TO BE D ETERMINED Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 2 of 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL INFORMATION ...............................................................................................4 WHO WE ARE: ......................................................................................................................................4 CULTURAL ARTS GRANT OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................4 MEASURE P ..........................................................................................................................................4 CATEGORY 4, MEASURE P ORDINANCE .......................................................................................................5 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN .............................................................................................................................5 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN VISION .............................................................................................................................. 6 GOALS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES ......................................................................................................................... 6 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS & CULTURE FUND ...................................................................................7 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT 2024-2025 GRANT GUIDELINES ...............................................................7 ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDING .........................................................................................................................7 INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 7 ELIGIBIE ORGANIZATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 7 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 8 TYPES OF GRANTS ..............................................................................................................................8 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT .................................................................................................................8 PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS .......................................................................................................................9 REQUEST AMOUNTS ........................................................................................................................ 10 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT ............................................................................................................... 10 FUNDING AMOUNTS ........................................................................................................................................ 10 FUNDING RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................................................................... 11 REQUIRED APPLICATION INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 12 NARRATIVE QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................... 12 Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 3 of 24 OVERVIEW OF APPLICATION PROCCESS AND REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 14 REQUIRED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE ................................................................................................ 14 ONLINE APPLICATION PROCESS ............................................................................................................... 15 ACCESSING ONLINE APPLICATION PLATFORM ........................................................................................................ 15 ACCESSING THE APPLICATION ............................................................................................................................ 15 WEBINARS, WORKSHOPS, TECH SUPPORT, OFFICE HOURS ..................................................................................... 15 APPLICATION COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................... 16 APPLICATION REVIEW AND EVALUATION .......................................................................................... 18 ELIGIBILITY AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 18 PANEL ADJUDICATION AND RANKING .................................................................................................................. 18 GRANT PANEL REVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 18 PANELISTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 HOW SCORING WORKS: ................................................................................................................................... 18 ADJUDICATION PANEL RANKING......................................................................................................................... 19 GRANTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PRAC ............................................................................................................ 19 ANNOUNCE INTENT TO AWARD ......................................................................................................................... 20 GRANTS AWARDED .......................................................................................................................................... 20 APPEALS ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 SELECTED GRANTEE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................ 21 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................. 23 Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 4 of 24 FRESNO ARTS COUNCIL INFORMATION WHO WE ARE: The Fresno Arts Council (FAC) is the state-local partner to the California Arts Council, designated by Resolution of the County Board of Supervisors to serve as the County’s arts agency. It is designated as the City of Fresno’s arts agency by Memorandum of Understanding. As the local arts agency, the FAC provides financial support, services, and other programs to a variety of cultural arts organizations, individual artists, and diverse communities throughout Fresno County. Our mission is to enrich people’s lives through the arts, and our purpose is to foster an arts community that recognizes and honors the contributions of its citizens to the arts. We are managed by a volunteer board of directors, and our agency solicits financial support from foundations, membership dues, and government and corporate funders, as well as private donors. The Fresno Arts Council (FAC) will award grants generated by the Measure P sales tax to nonprofit community-based organizations for the purpose of increasing access to the Arts in the City of Fresno. Contact Information: Please direct questions regarding Operating Grant Guidelines to Lilia Gonzáles Chávez, Executive Director, at lilia@fresnoartscouncil.org or [Grants Manager] at [email]. CULTURAL ARTS GRANT OVERVIEW MEASURE P In 2018, City of Fresno residents voted to approve Measure P, also known as the FRESNO CLEAN AND SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX, a three-eighths (.0375) percent sales tax ordinance, dedicated to improving parks, arts, and recreation facilities, services, and access in the City of Fresno. Funds collected by the sales tax can be used for purposes including, but not limited to, clean and safe parks; new parks and recreation facilities; youth and senior recreation and after -school facilities and job training; improved walking and biking trails; the San Joaquin River Parkway; beautification of streets; and expanded access to arts and culture. Measure P is a renewable thirty -year initiative implemented by the City of Fresno with oversight by the Parks, Recreation, and Arts Commission (PRAC), a nine member committee established by the ordinance, with Mayoral appointments. Twelve Percent (12%) of funds collected by the sales tax are designated for improving access to arts and culture via competitive grants for cultural arts nonprofit organizations within City limits. This process is discussed in category 4 of the ordinance. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 5 of 24 CATEGORY 4, MEASURE P ORDINANCE Fresno Municipal Code Section 7-1506(b) (4) Expanded Access to Arts and Culture. (A) Twelve percent (12%) percent of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. (B) Grants funded pursuant to this paragraph shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council, or its successor local arts agency, using multiple solicitations that allow for a diverse set of programs, with different program sizes and reach, including core operating and project-support grants, to be funded. The Commission shall ensure that grant applications are reviewed in a transparent, competitive process. (C) Prior to the implementation of subparagraph (B), the Commission shall work in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council, and local arts and cultural stakeholders, to develop a Cultural Arts Plan for the City of Fresno that would identify needs in the arts and cultural community; prioritize outcomes and investments; and develop a vision and goals for the future of Fresno arts and cultural programs that are reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno. This process shall include a robust community engagement process, including multiple public meetings. The Cultural Arts Plan shall be updated every five years by the Commission. (D) Funding for operating support distributed pursuant to this paragraph shall support organizational stability for arts and cultural organizations that reflect the cultural, geographic and demographic diversity of the City of Fresno; and reflect the proportion of each grantee's overall operations that serves residents within, or visitors to, the City of Fresno sphere of influence. (E) Grants funded pursuant to subparagraph (B) shall prioritize organizations and programs that support and expand diverse public or youth engagement and equity. CULTURAL ARTS PLAN Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan [link] was developed through a year-long process involving robust community participation. A partnership between a consultant group, Network for Culture and Arts Policy (NCAP), the City of Fresno PARCS Department, Fresno Arts Council, and the Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (PRAC), with multiple opportunities for public surveys, meetings, and draft comments, individual interviews with community arts stakeholders, and research into Fresno’s cultural arts assets and needs, ultimately led to the approval and adoption of Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan, which must be reassessed and updated every five years, according to requirements set forth in the ordinance. The Cultural Arts Plan was adopted by the Fresno City Council on August 10, 2023. Fresno’s Cultural Arts Plan identifies the following goals, with associated strategies, in addition to defining funding priorities. These goals and funding priorities informed the development of Cultural Arts Grant Programs, managed by the Fresno Arts Council with stakeholder input and PRAC involvement and oversight. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 6 of 24 CULTURAL ARTS PLAN VISION Cultural arts in Fresno will be recognized, prioritized, inclusive, accessible, and continue to reflect, celebrate, and connect the community. GOALS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES (see [link] for recommendations, strategies, and funding priorities): I. GRANT-MAKING & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Desired Outcome: Establish a strong foundation to support and expand access to arts and culture through grant-making and community engagement. II. STABILIZE, RESTORE & ACTIVATE Desired Outcome: Cultural arts organizations and assets will be stabilized, restored and activated to expand access to arts and culture. III. EDUCATION & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Desired Outcome: Expand access to a variety of arts and cultural education programs to provide educational opportunities for people of all ages. Desired Outcome: Equip artists, cultural practitioners and organizations with the skills and organizational resources to stabilize and expand operations. IV. CELEBRATE & ENHANCE Desired Outcome: Elevate and celebrate arts and culture to strengthen a sense of community. V. ADDRESS BARRIERS, INNOVATE & EXPAND Desired Outcome: Expand access to arts and culture by eliminating barriers and investing in innovation. VI. MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS & POLICIES TO SUPPORT CULTURAL ARTS Desired Outcome: Establish a strong foundation to support and expand access to arts and culture through policy planning and municipal investment. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 7 of 24 EXPANDED ACCESS TO ARTS & CULTURE FUND GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT 2024 -2025 GRANT GUIDELINES Deadline: To be determined Grant Awards: Up to $300,000 Grant Activity Period: To be determined ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDING INELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS • Organizations that do not have their principal place of business in the City of Fresno. • Organizations whose primary mission is to raise funds • Organizations whose primary function is regranting • K-12 Schools • County Offices of Education • Public and Private Colleges and Universities • Government agencies and departments that have a line item in the City of Fresno Budget. • Organizations that do not serve the public and/or provide public programing. • Individuals ELIGIBIE ORGANIZATIONS • Operating support grants are specifically for arts and cultural organizations that reflect the cultural, geographic and demographic diversity of the City of Fresno; and reflect the proportion of each grantee's overall operations that serves residents within, or visitors to, the City of Fresno sphere of influence. • 501(c)(3) Nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. • Applicants with an eligible 501(c)(3) Fiscal Sponsor. • Applicants using fiscal sponsors. An Applicant that is without its own organizational nonprofit status must use a Fresno-based fiscal sponsor organization with a federal 501(c)(3) designation, and has experience supporting and expanding access to arts and cultural programming, to apply for funding that support and expands access to arts and cultural programming. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 8 of 24 • Types of applicant organizations eligible to apply using a fiscal sponsor include, but are not limited to, individual artists and culture bearers, artist collectives and cultural collectives, and other unincorporated arts and culture guilds. • An Applicant’s selected fiscal sponsors must demonstrate at least two (2) years of arts and culture programming and service as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization; for Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grant Applicants, the fiscally sponsored applicant or newly formed 501(c)(3) organization is not required to have its own two-year history of arts and culture operational and financial experience at the time of application submission. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS • City of Fresno-based: documentation of being a Fresno-based nonprofit organization that supports and expands access to arts and cultural programing, or nonprofit social service organization with regular ongoing arts programming and/or services and a principal place of business in the City of Fresno. • Certificate of good standing: Nonprofit organizations and fiscal sponsors (if applicable) must have “active status” with the California Secretary of State (SOS) showing evidence of “good standing “at the time of application. o Organizations must also be in good standing with the Office of the Attorney General of California or provide an adequate letter of explanation regarding registration status. o The organization must operate and offer its programs in a nondiscriminatory manner and in compliance with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, laws protecting persons with disabilities. • Letter of agreement: If using a Nonprofit Fiscal Sponsor, the Fiscal Sponsor must provide a letter of agreement acknowledging the fiscal sponsorship with the project applicant and submit the letter with the application. If the grant is awarded, the fiscal sponsor becomes the legal contract holder with the Fresno Arts Council. Once a contract is awarded the fiscal sponsor cannot be changed. TYPES OF GRANTS GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT General Operating Support was called out in the Ordinance to support organizational stability for arts and cultural organizations that reflect the cultural, geographic, and demographic diversity of the City of Fresno; and reflect the proportion of each grantee’s overall operations that serves residents within, or visitors to, the City of Fresno’s sphere of influence. Grants shall prioritize organizations and programs that support and expand diverse public or youth engagement and equity. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 9 of 24 General Operating Support Grants are intended to provide core support to Cultural Arts Organizations to sustain and increase community access to a broad and diverse range of opportunities in the arts. The General Operating Support grant provides direct funding for ongoing operations. This grant contributes to a robust and diverse arts workforce and infrastructure. Funds may be used to support any eligible expenses associated with the general operations of Cultural Arts Organizations, including but not limited to rent, utilities, and staff salaries. Applying for this grant does not restrict an organization from applying for other project-based grants. General Operating Support grants are intended to support the applicant organization in carrying out its mission. Funding is not intended to support a specific project. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants may be awarded to Operating Support Grant applicants who meet the following criteria: Applicants are limited to nonprofit arts and cultural organizations with annual revenue less than $50,000, regardless of years of operation; such organizations may apply for support of up to 100% of their annual revenue. Emerging Arts and Culture Organizations are encouraged to apply for Operating Support Grants that build capacity and expand their ability to reach and serve residents and visitors in the City of Fresno. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants prioritize investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno. PROJECT SPECIFIC GRANTS Deadline: TBD Grant Awards: $2,000 to $200,000 Grant Activity Period: TBD Project Specific Grants will be made to support specific projects that respond to the goals of the Cultural Plan. Project Specific Grants can be used to pay artists’ fees, acquire project-specific supplies and materials, or acquire equipment required to complete the project; venue, and technical costs are additional examples of allowable expenses. Guidelines and Application for Project Specific Grants can be accessed here: [link]. *Note: Future Grant Programs informed by the Cultural Arts Plan and future CAP revisions may be developed. Guidelines will be posted as new funding programs are offered. Please visit fresnoartscouncil.org for updates and information. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 10 of 24 REQUEST AMOUNTS GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT FUNDING AMOUNTS Each grant application funding cycle, available funding will be allocated approximately 50/50 between the two types of grants (all contemplated allocations may be adjusted in response to community need and interest; actual awards will also be affected by application quality as related to applicable scoring criteria). General Operating Support Grants (this document) Other Operating Support - Approximately 40% of available funding Applicants limited to nonprofit arts and cultural organizations; may apply for: Budget Category Annual income as reported to the IRS Anticipated % of funding eligible for 1 Less than $250,000 Up to 70% 2 $251,000 and above Up to 30% capped at $300,000 Applicants who qualify as an Emerging Arts and Culture Organization, as defined below, shall first be reviewed for that tier of award. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants – Approximately 10% of available funding Applicants are limited to nonprofit arts and cultural organizations with annual revenue less than $50,000, regardless of years of operation; may apply for support of up to 100% of their annual revenue Emerging Arts and Culture Organizations are encouraged to apply for Operating Support Grants that build capacity and expand their ability to reach and serve residents and visitors in the City of Fresno. Emerging Arts and Culture Organization Support Grants prioritize investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 11 of 24 Project Specific Grants (see [link]) Other Project Specific Grants – Approximately 40% of available funding Project specific grants are available to nonprofit arts and culture organizations, nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming, and Projects under an eligible Fiscal Sponsor; may apply for projects between $2,000 and $200,000. Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants – Approximately 10% of available funding Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants are available to eligible Project Specific Grant applicants who do not have two years of fiscal history and/or two years of prior activity supporting and expanding access to arts and culture programming, at the time of application submission. Emerging Arts and Culture Project Specific Grants will not exceed $50,000 each—prioritizing investment reflective of the cultural, demographic, and geographic diversity of Fresno, supporting and expanding diverse public or youth engagement, and equity. Distribution is dependent on available funds annually. FUNDING RESTRICTIONS • Matching funds: are not required. • Applicants must apply for the funding category that applies to their organization. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 12 of 24 REQUIRED APPLICATION INFORMATION NARRATIVE QUESTIONS All questions should provide the reviewer with information that helps them best understand your organization. Word count is to provide enough space for you to respond as completely as possible. If you can provide enough information with fewer words, that will not be held against you. Emerging Organizations should only answer questions 1, 4, 5, and 6 1) Organization Description a. What is your mission? b. How does your work align with the Cultural Plan? c. Describe how your organization evaluates the quality and success of your programs. d. How do you engage in planning (i.e., who is involved in planning, how far in advance do you plan your programming, do you have a strategic plan or a set of overarching goals)? If so, upload your most recent planning documents. e. How does your organization intend to make use of General Operating Support funds if awarded? 750 words Upload: 2) Programming Share what the review panel should know about the organization’s arts and cultural programs. Consider the following questions to help shape your narrative: a. What are the primary activities of the organization? Describe the major programs open to the public. b. Describe key exhibitors/presenters, artists, and other collaborators. c. Identify how you include individual artists in your work. If you do not currently include individual artists, how will you include them in the future? d. Describe the process the organization employs to select or create artistic programming. e. If arts and culture are not the mission of the organization, describe your arts and cultural programming, and describe how it fits within your larger organizational work. 750 words Upload the following: a. List of arts and cultural activities FY 2022-23 (1 page PDF) b. List of arts and cultural activities FY 2023-24 (1 page PDF) Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 13 of 24 3) Cultural equity and inclusion statements and policy a. Does the organization have an equity statement or other formalized diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts? If so, please upload any relevant documentation. b. What are the organizations perceived needs and or plans for increasing diversity in board, staff, programming, and audiences over the next year? c. What barriers, if any, are you removing to make that possible? 750 words Upload: 4) Organizational Challenges a. What do you identify as your greatest challenges? b. Describe how you will address these challenges. c. Describe how these grant funds would be used to help address these challenges. d. What do you perceive as barriers to your organization increasing access to arts and culture? 750 words 5) Proposed Impact and Outcomes (organizational and community) Consider the following: a. What work is the organization most proud of? b. What outcomes are you envisioning from this grant support? c. How will your organization measure the impact of this award? 750 Words 6) Governance and Administrative Structure a. Describe your governance structure, including board meeting frequency, and board committee structure. Upload a board roster, include members’ names, occupation if known, and any other demographic information that you would like considered. b. Describe your administrative structure, including administrative, program, or cultural and/or artistic staff. List primary staff names, titles, and duties. Provide brief bios for key staff and include years with the organization. c. How are the board, staff, and programming reflective of Fresno’s citywide demographics? 750 words Upload: Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 14 of 24 OVERVIEW OF APPLICATION PROCCESS AND REQUIREMENTS Calendar and Timeline (Specific dates to be determined) Grants are accepted annually. Guidelines and Application Available November [X], 2023 Webinars and Office Hours Workshop webinars and office hours will be offered in Winter 2023. Check [link] for full schedule. Open Application Period November X, 2023-January X, 2024 Staff Eligibility Review Winter 2023-24 Panel Review February-March 2024 PRAC Commission Review and Adopts Recommendations Spring 2024 Notifications Sent via Email Spring 2024 Awards Disbursed Spring 2024 Grant Period TBD REQUIRED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE Minimum Standards of Practice for All Organizations or Fiscal Sponsors: • General Liability insurance • Workman’s Compensation insurance (provide basis for exemption if applicable) • Current practice of annual Year-End Financial Review completed by an external Certified Public Accountant/Firm for organizations with a budget of $2 million and above. • The applicant organization must have a functioning Board of Directors that meets regularly. • Applicants using a fiscal sponsor must demonstrate that the fiscal sponsor can meet these requirements. • Additional data/demographic requirements from City of Fresno. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 15 of 24 ONLINE APPLICATION PROCESS ACCESSING ONLINE APPLICATION PLATFORM Fresno Arts Council uses Submittable to accept and manage grant request applications. You will need to create organizational/user accounts and profiles. Access the online application portal at https://fresnoartscouncil.submittable.com . Application Instructions are available [here]. For questions, please contact Fresno Arts Council at 559-237-9734 or email [grants email]. Fresno Arts Council encourages you to attend webinars, office hours, and make use of instructional resources early in your application process. FAC strongly recommends submitting the application and required supporting materials at least five (5) business days before the deadline to provide time to troubleshoot any technical issues. The deadline to submit the online grant applications will be on [TBD]. To ensure that organizations have enough time to prepare, the grant guidelines and application will be posted, and the application will open for a minimum of 60 days. ACCESSING THE APPLICATION Read the Application Instructions prior to completing an application. You do not have to complete and submit the application in one sitting; you may save and return to it as many times as you like. WEBINARS, WORKSHOPS, TECH SUPPORT, OFFICE HOURS All organizations that are considering applying for a grant are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to attend the pre- application workshop(s) offered by FAC. At the workshops, staff will review the guidelines and demonstrate Submittable, FAC’s online grant application system. Applicants are also encouraged to consult with the program staff well in advance of the application deadline if they have any questions about program requirements. In person and virtual office hours will be posted on [link]. Webinar Schedule: TBD In person workshop: TBD Office Hours Schedule: TBD FAQs: [link/PDF] Email Support: For technical assistance and grant guideline questions, please call 559-237-9734 Monday through Friday, between the hours of 9:00AM and 3:00PM. You may also email X at [email]. Please allow at 24-48 hours for staff response. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 16 of 24 APPLICATION COMPONENTS A. Eligibility Check list: [link to application system] B. Applicant Information • Legal Name of Organization/Applicant (and Fiscal Sponsor, if applicable) • DBA Name of Organization/Applicant, if applicable • Founding Date: Enter the year your organization was founded or began activity • Address: PDF proof of address upload • Fresno City Council District where Organization/Applicant is located: [link to finder tool] • Organization/Applicant Phone • Primary Contact Name, title, email, phone • Organization/Applicant Website • Type of organization (drop-down menu: 501(c)(3); fiscally sponsored) • Organization or Fiscal Sponsor EIN number • Which month and day does your organization’s or Fiscal Sponsor’s fiscal year end? • Primary Discipline? (drop-down menu) • Organization Mission/Purpose: Enter your organization’s mission statement, or primary purpose. Your mission statement should be concise. Do not add program details here. • Has your organization, or your Fiscal Sponsor, conducted a majority of its cultural arts programming within the City of Fresno for the past two years preceding this application? C. Annual Income as reported to the IRS D. Required Financial Forms and/or Reports: All attachments must be in PDF format, with exception of Supporting Material(s) and Work Samples. For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of $50,000 or less: • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990, 990EZ or 990N For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of between $50,000 and $200,000 • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990 or 990EZ • Accountant reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year OR if this financial report is not yet available, a letter from the CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For 501(c)(3) Cultural Arts Organizations with a budget of $200,000 or more • IRS Designation Letter • Federal Form 990 Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 17 of 24 • Independent Financial Audit (for organizations with a budget of $2 million or more) or reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year; OR if this financial report is not yet available, a letter from the CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For fiscally sponsored projects: • Sponsor organization’s IRS Designation Letter • Sponsor organization’s Federal Form 990 • A signed letter of agreement between the fiscal sponsor and the project applicant outlining the terms of the agreement and services • If the sponsor’s budget exceeds $2 million, An Independent Financial Audit OR letter from CPA stating when it will be completed AND internally-generated financial statements for most recently completed fiscal year. For sponsors with a budget between $200,000 and $1,999,999, submit a CPA-reviewed Financial Report for most recently completed fiscal year. E. Proposed Grants Budget Please complete this budget template [link] F. Work Samples You are required to submit at least one work sample that exemplifies the cultural and/or artistic programs or events presented by your organization. This may include video or audio recordings, or digital images of performances, exhibitions, or events. Select the type of work sample that is most relevant to your organization. Maximum of 6 work samples accepted. G. Supporting Documents You may upload or provide links for up to three supporting documents from the past five years that demonstrate the impact of your programs on viewers/participants. Examples include: letters of support, participant testimonials, reviews, audience surveys, social media posts. This section is OPTIONAL, however you are strongly encouraged to submit at least one document. These documents help reviewers understand the impact of your programs on participants and audience members. Note: You may upload a document or provide links. You may provide a title and brief description for necessary context. 3 documents maximum. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 18 of 24 APPLICATION REVIEW AND EVALUATION ELIGIBILITY AND COMPLETENESS REVIEW Once the application window closes, Fresno Arts Council staff will review applications for eligibility and completeness. Once an application has been submitted, it cannot be reopened, revised, or resubmitted. Applications that pass this initial review will then be evaluated for their strengths by a separate Grant Review Panel, which will rely substantially on the information provided in the application and supporting materials submitted by applicants. PANEL ADJUDICATION AND RANKING An adjudication panel will be established that includes community members, artists and culture bearers, and arts and culture administrators. The Commission and Fresno Arts Council shall ensure that grant applications are reviewed in a transparent, competitive process. GRANT PANEL REVIEW The adjudication panel is comprised mainly of individuals with substantial background in arts and culture, usually drawn from the ranks of experienced and skilled arts and culture practitioners, administrators, managers and board members of City of Fresno arts and cultural organizations, the Cultural Arts Subcommittee or other applicable PRAC subcommittee, and experienced arts and culture grant-makers from philanthropic and public sectors. PANELISTS A call for panelists will come out at the same time as the Request for Proposal. A list of eligible panelists will be submitted to the PRAC prior to the start of the adjudication process. Panelists will be required to declare any possible conflict of interest at the time of application. Declaration of Conflict of Interest form is included here as an attachment. Panelists may not be on the board or staff of any applicant for that grant cycle, nor related by blood or marriage to any applicant in that grant cycle. HOW SCORING WORKS: Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 19 of 24 Adjudication of applications is based on 6 weighted questions. 1) Organization Description 10% 2) Programming 30% 3) Cultural equity and inclusion statements and policy 20% 4) Organizational Challenges 10% 5) Proposed Impact and Outcomes (organizational and community) 20% 6) Governance and Administrative Structure 10% Emerging Organizations will be scored on: • Organization Description 30% • Organizational Challenges 30% • Proposed Impact and Outcomes (organizational and community) 20% • Governance and Administrative Structure 20% Scores for each assessment category are collected from individual panelists. Each organization’s category scores, and cumulative total are reported back to them during the award notifications process. ADJUDICATION PANEL RANKING Rank Rank Description 6 - Exemplary Overwhelmingly achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to the highest degree 5 - Strong Strongly achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to a significant degree 4 - Good Sufficiently achieves the purpose of the program. Meets all the review criteria and project requirements to some degree 3 - Fair Moderately achieves the purpose of the program. Meets most of the review criteria and project requirements 2 - Marginal Minimally achieves the purpose of the program. Meets some of the review criteria and project requirements 1 - Weak Does not achieve the purpose of the program; proposals that are not appropriate for this grant category. Inadequately meets the review criteria or project requirement GRANTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PRAC Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 20 of 24 Following the Grant Panel Review process, Fresno Arts Council will submit grant application rankings and award recommendations to the Parks, Recreation, and Arts Commission (PRAC) for final acceptance. ANNOUNCE INTENT TO AWARD Once recommendations have been accepted by the PRAC, Fresno Arts Council will publish an intent to award a press release announcing grant recipients, funding amounts, and project descriptions. Anticipated TBA 2024. GRANTS AWARDED [Grant year] Organizational General Operating Support funds will be awarded [insert date TBA] and disbursed [date/method] Project Specific Grant funds will be awarded [insert date TBA] and disbursed [date/method] APPEALS Any applicant not recommended to receive an award may submit a written appeal to Fresno Arts Council staff no later than 5:00 p.m. by the tenth calendar day following notification from staff to the applicant that no award is being recommended. Staff will review the appeal and present it to the PRAC subcommittee for review and recommendation. The PRAC will make the final ruling. Upon request from an appellant, staff will provide written comments submitted by the evaluation panels, to help the appellant prepare their response. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 21 of 24 SELECTED GRANTEE REQUIREMENTS The following are a list of additional requirements that will be included in the grantee agreement. Legal Requirements Insurance/endorsements Conflict of Interest disclosure statement Data Collection At a minimum, data collected shall include information needed to demonstrate compliance with Section 7- 1506(b)(4)(D) such as: (a) Attendance data: (i) Number of youth participants served. Youth shall be defined as age seventeen (17) and younger. (ii) Number of adult participants served. Adult shall be defined as ages eighteen (18) through sixty-one (61). (iii) Number of senior participants served. Senior shall be defined as age sixty -two (62) and older. (b) Participant zip code data to identify the number and percentage of City of Fresno residents served. (c) race, ethnicity, household income and gender identity. (d) For murals only: total square feet installed and location/address. (e) Photos and/or videos highlighting grant funded projects, events, programs, etc. Vendors Tax Copyright Background Check/Mandated Reporter, etc. Invoicing for and receipt of grant payments Project amendments Credit/Recognition Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 22 of 24 Grant recipients are required to acknowledge the support of the Measure P, Parks and Arts ordinance and Fresno Arts Council to demonstrate how City funds support arts and culture. Recipients receiving funds must use the required logos and credit line on all printed and electronic materials that advertise performances, exhibitions, or other public events throughout their work or, for those receiving operating support, throughout the grant period. The credit line and links to logos are listed below: • “This work [event, organization, project] is funded in part by the City of Fresno Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Fund through Fresno Arts Council.” • [Links to required logos] Cultural Arts Calendar Grantees must submit programming information and flyers to be included in the Cultural Arts Calendar at [link]. Reporting (midterm and final) 90% of grant funds will be awarded at the beginning of the grants cycle with the remaining 10% awarded when final reports are submitted. Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 23 of 24 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Eligibility Checklist FAQs APPENDICES Measure P Ordinance Cultural Arts Plan DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH AN APPLICANT FOR FUNDING (available on application site) 1 Are you currently in litigation with a grant applicant or any of its agents? YES NO 2 Do you represent any firm, organization, or person who is in litigation with a grant applicant? YES NO 3 Do you currently represent or perform work for any clients who do business with the Applicant? YES NO 4 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, owners or investors in a business which does business with a grant applicant, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Fresno? YES NO 5 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, related by blood or marriage to anyone applying for funds? YES NO 6 Do you or any of your subcontractors have, or expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract in connection with the grant applicant? YES NO * If the answer to any question is yes, please explain here. Explanation: Signature________________________________________Date__________________ Fresno Arts Council 1245 Van Ness Ave. Fresno, CA 93721 (559)237-9734 https://www.fresnoartscouncil.org Page 24 of 24 (Print Name)______________________________________________________ (Company)_____________________________________________________________ (Address)______________________________________________________________ (City, State Zip)_________________________________________________________ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department BY:SARAH GAYTAN, Program Manager Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant guidelines. RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting the Fresno City Council approve the grant guidelines established by the Fresno Arts Council in partnership with Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission). This request is in accordance with the Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) between the Fresno Arts Council and the City of Fresno, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax (Measure P) allocates 12% of funds collected for competitive grants aiding nonprofit organizations to expand access to arts and culture. The grant guidelines prepared by the Commission and Fresno Arts Council are now presented to City Council for consideration and adoption. BACKGROUND In 2018, a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. In accordance with the Agreement dated August 10, 2023, Fresno Arts Council developed written grant guidelines to make grant awards. The Agreement requires the grant guidelines to be consistent with the priorities, recommendations, and strategies identified in the City adopted Cultural Arts Plan and the requirements outlined in the Measure P Ordinance. Grant guidelines shall include all information necessary to ensure a transparent process, including, but not limited to scoring criteria, City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. eligible scoring committee members, process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, priority funding categories, expenditure delivery deadlines, and risk assessments. Grants funded shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council or its successor local arts agency. The Commission provided input on the grant guidelines prepared by the Fresno Arts Council and recommended the guidelines for adoption at their October 16, 2023, Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A- Does not apply to this action. FISCAL IMPACT Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 in Article 15 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants. Funding for the grant program and grant program administration is reflected in the FY 2024 PARCS budget and fully encumbered to the Fresno Arts Council consistent with the Agreement. Attachments: Resolution Project Specific Grant Guidelines General Operating Support Grant Guidelines City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department BY: SARAH GAYTAN, Program Manager Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department SUBJECT ..Title ***RESOLUTION – Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Guidelines ..Body RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Fresno City Council approve the grant guidelines established by the Fresno Arts Council in partnership with Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission). This recommendation is in accordance with the Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) between the Fresno Arts Council and the City of Fresno, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax (Measure P) allocates 12% of funds collected for competitive grants aiding nonprofit organizations to expand access to arts and culture. The grant guidelines prepared by the Commission and Fresno Arts Council are now presented to City Council for consideration and adoption. BACKGROUND In 2018, a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. In accordance with the Agreement dated August 10, 2023, Fresno Arts Council developed written grant guidelines to make grant awards. The Agreement requires the grant guidelines to be consistent with the priorities, recommendations, and strategies identified in the City adopted Cultural Arts Plan and the requirements outlined in the Measure P Ordinance. Grant guidelines shall include all information necessary to ensure a transparent process, including, but not limited to scoring criteria, eligible scoring committee members, process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, priority funding categories, expenditure delivery deadlines, and risk assessments. Grants funded shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council or its successor local arts agency. The Commission provided input on the grant guidelines prepared by the Fresno Arts Council [and recommended the guidelines for adoption at their October 16, 2023, Commission meeting]. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A- Does not apply to this action. FISCAL IMPACT Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 in Article 15 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants. Funding for the grant program and grant program administration is reflected in the FY 2024 PARCS budget and fully encumbered to the Fresno Arts Council consistent with the Agreement. Attachment: Resolution Project Specific Grant Guidelines General Operating Support Grant Guidelines City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1592 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-C. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:SUMEET MAHLI, Director Personnel Services Department BY:VANESSA PERALES, Human Resources Manager Personnel Services Department SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the Sixth Amendment to Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023- 183, amending Exhibit 14, Unit 14, Management Classes (CFMEA) by adding the new classification and providing a monthly salary step plan range for Clinic Manager, effective November 6, 2023 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council adopt the Sixth Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183 effective November 6, 2023, to amend Exhibit 14, Unit 14, Management Classes (CFMEA) by adding the new classification and providing a monthly salary step plan range for Clinic Manager in the new Animal Center Department. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On September 14, 2023, Council approved actions pertaining to the creation of the Animal Center within the City of Fresno, including adding 77 positions to staff the center. At that time, the City advised Council that Personnel Services Staff in collaboration with the Animal Center would continue to return to Council to recommend the addition of new Animal Center focused job classifications, positions, and respective salary ranges in order to adequately recruit and fill positions at the Center. Subsequently, Council approved the addition of two new classifications for Animal Programs Coordinator and Registered Veterinary Technician on September 28, 2023; and seven new classifications for Animal Care Specialist I/II/Senior, Animal Services Representative I/II/Senior and Animal Center Supervisor on October 19, 2023. Adopting the Sixth Amendment to the Salary Resolution will result in the creation of a new classification and monthly salary step plan range for Clinic Manager. This action will not require additional funding or an increase in total positions to the Animal Center Department. The City has provided notice to the respective bargaining unit and will follow the meet City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 R. 2023-288 APPROVED ON CONSENT File #:ID 23-1592 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-C. and confer process where applicable. BACKGROUND On September 14,2023,Council approved actions pertaining to the creation of the Animal Center within the City of Fresno,including adding 77 positions to staff the center.At that time,the City advised Council that Personnel Services Staff in collaboration with the Animal Center would continue to return to Council to recommend the addition of new Animal Center focused job classifications, positions,and respective salary ranges in order to adequately recruit and fill positions at the Center. On September 28,2023,Council approved the addition of two new classifications recommended for Animal Programs Coordinator and Registered Veterinary Technician.On October 19,2023,Council approved the addition of seven new classifications recommended for Animal Care Specialist I/II/Senior, Animal Services Representative I/II/Senior and Animal Center Supervisor. In continued collaboration with the Animal Center Department,an additional new classification is recommended as follows. Exhibit 14, Unit 14, Management Classes (CFMEA) ·Add the new classification of Clinic Manager.This new classification will be focused on the supervision and oversight of veterinary medical processes including ordering controlled substances for animal care and carrying out the Veterinarians directives. o Clinic Manager monthly salary will be set at Step A - Step I: $7,196 - $8,766. The City has provided notice to the respective bargaining unit and will follow the meet and confer process where applicable. The City Attorney’s Office has approved the Sixth Amendment to Fiscal Year 2024 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183 as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378 this item does not qualify as a “project”and is therefore exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act requirements LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not implicated because this item does not involve public contracting or bidding with the City of Fresno. FISCAL IMPACT Amending Exhibit 14 will not require additional appropriations. City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1592 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-C. Attachments: Resolution: Sixth Amendment to FY24 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183 Salary Tables: Sixth Amendment to FY24 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183 - Redline Salary Tables: Sixth Amendment to FY24 Salary Resolution No. 2023-183 - Final City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ SEE APPENDIX FOR FOOTNOTES Page 14.1 EXHIBIT 14 Unit 14 – Management Classes (CFMEA) CLASS TITLE JOB CODE PROB PER A B C D E F G H I ADA Coordinator 150231e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Administrative Manager 220025e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Airports Marketing & Public Relations Coordinator 310150e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Airports Operations Manager 310020e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Airports Planning Manager 310019e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Airports Properties Manager 310021e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Airports Safety Management Systems Manager 310161e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Assistant City Clerk 115030e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Building Services Manager 230031e - 11245 11527 11816 12111 12415 12724 13043 13367 13702 Business Manager 150019e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Clinic ManagerVI 560061e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Communications Manager 125060e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Construction Manager 210096e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Crime Scene Investigation Bureau Manager 410015e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Cybersecurity Manager 125092e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Deputy City Engineer 210081e - 11245 11527 11816 12111 12415 12724 13043 13367 13702 Division Manager 150024e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Economic Development Analyst 150095e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Emergency Services Dispatch Manager 410005e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Facilities Manager 810040e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 e Exempt class, See Section 4 VIEffective November 6, 2023, by the Sixth Amendment to the Salary Resolution No. 2023-183. SEE APPENDIX FOR FOOTNOTES Page 14.1 EXHIBIT 14 Unit 14 – Management Classes (CFMEA) CLASS TITLE JOB CODE PROB PER A B C D E F G H I ADA Coordinator 150231e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Administrative Manager 220025e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Airports Marketing & Public Relations Coordinator 310150e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Airports Operations Manager 310020e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Airports Planning Manager 310019e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Airports Properties Manager 310021e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Airports Safety Management Systems Manager 310161e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Assistant City Clerk 115030e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Building Services Manager 230031e - 11245 11527 11816 12111 12415 12724 13043 13367 13702 Business Manager 150019e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Clinic ManagerVI 560061e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Communications Manager 125060e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Construction Manager 210096e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Crime Scene Investigation Bureau Manager 410015e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Cybersecurity Manager 125092e - 9483 9719 9963 10211 10466 10728 10996 11272 11554 Deputy City Engineer 210081e - 11245 11527 11816 12111 12415 12724 13043 13367 13702 Division Manager 150024e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Economic Development Analyst 150095e - 7196 7376 7560 7748 7941 8141 8345 8552 8766 Emergency Services Dispatch Manager 410005e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 Facilities Manager 810040e - 8622 8838 9059 9285 9518 9754 9998 10248 10503 e Exempt class, See Section 4 VIEffective November 6, 2023, by the Sixth Amendment to the Salary Resolution No. 2023-183. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1425 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-D. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JENNIFER CLARK, Director Planning and Development Department THROUGH:PHIL SKEI, Assistant Director Planning and Development Department BY:CORRINA NUNEZ, Project Manager Housing and Community Development Division SUBJECT Approve a $253,673 HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Community Housing Development Organization Agreement with Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., for the construction of a single-family house at 64 E. Atchison Street in southwest Fresno (Council District 3). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council approve a $253,673.00 HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program, Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Agreement (Exhibit “A” - HOME CHDO Agreement) with Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., (Habitat) for the construction of a single-family house at 64 E. Atchison Street in Fresno, 93706. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On August 10, 2022, Habitat was selected through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) to receive $253,673.00 in 2022-2023 HOME CHDO funds for its 64 E. Atchison Street single-family housing project. Habitat’s proposed 64 E. Atchison Street project is City-certified to be developed under CHDO status and eligible to receive HOME CHDO funding. BACKGROUND As an entitlement jurisdiction receiving an annual allocation of federal HOME Program funding, the City is required to set aside at least 15% of its annual HOME allocation for a certified CHDO project. CHDOs must be a private nonprofit community-based service organization meeting the definition of “Community Housing Development Organization” and must be able to document that the organization has the capacity to own, develop, or sponsor a housing project each time a commitment of funds is provided to a specific project. In previous years, the City would certify an organization as a CHDO every couple of years. However, revised HOME Program rules require CHDO certification each time a new project is proposed. Habitat has served as a CHDO under the HOME program since City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MOVED TO 11/16/2023 BY STAFF NEW FILE ID 23-1623 File #:ID 23-1425 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-D. each time a new project is proposed.Habitat has served as a CHDO under the HOME program since 1994 and its projects continue to be City certified. On June 8,2022,the Community Development Division released an Affordable Housing NOFA that included the $543,761 set aside for 2022-2023 HOME CHDO funding. In response to the NOFA,the Community Development Division received Habitat’s 64 E.Atchison Street project application,the only HOME CHDO eligible project,requesting $253,673.00 of the $543,761 set aside for 2022-2023 CHDO activities.The estimated cost of the project is $526,326.00: $253,673.00 in City HOME CHDO funds and $272,653 in Habitat funds.Habitat owns the property at 64 Atchison (Exhibit B -Project Location Maps)which it purchased through the Chapter 8 County tax sale process. If approved as recommended,Habitat will enter into a HOME CHDO Agreement for $253,673.00 at 2%interest,with the interest converting to zero percent upon conveyance of the loan portion to the homebuyer as mortgage assistance.Once completed,Habitat will transfer ownership of the house to the low-income homebuyer through escrow.The balance of any loan portion,if any,will be paid by Habitat.Also,upon transfer of the property to a low-income homebuyer,Habitat will be released from repayment of the homebuyer mortgage assistance portion. The single-family house to be constructed at 64 E.Atchison will consist of 3-bedrooms/2baths with 1,200 square feet of living space and an attached two-car garage.Habitat will utilize its “sweat equity” building technique and incorporate the City’s Universal Design element into the house.The “sweat equity”method requires that each member of the homebuyer’s household contribute at least five hundred hours of “sweat equity”to help build their house.Habitat will also provide homeownership training in the areas of home maintenance,home improvement,interior design,and consumer awareness. Habitat has been a leading non-profit housing development organization in Fresno County since 1985 and continues to provide safe,decent,and affordable housing for lower income residents. Habitat’s mission and home building strategy is to partner with low-income households to help ensure that homeownership is a life-long positive and successful experience for all members of the household. Project partners include Pacific Gas and Electric,Wells Fargo Bank,Premier Valley Bank,Bank of the Sierra,Bank of the West,Mitchell Aire,Hunter Douglas,Val Spar,Cargill,and the San Francisco Federal Home Loan Bank. Once the project is complete,the single-family housing unit will be counted towards the City’s affordable housing goals as identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element,2020-2024 Consolidated Plan,2023-2025 One Fresno Housing Strategy,and the 2023-2024 Annual Action Plan for new housing development.The proposed single-family house developed at this vacant parcel will also help to make a positive impact to the neighborhood by offering new,in-fill,durable affordable single- family housing. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The Planning and Development Department determined that it has ministerial authority to approve the project,which is statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)pursuant to City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1425 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-D. the project,which is statutorily exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)pursuant to Article 18,Statutory Exemptions,Section 15268 of the State CEQA Guidelines.In addition,on October 11,2022,a National Environmental Policy Act for the project activities resulted in a Finding of No Significant Impact and on January 20,2023,the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development issued authorization to use HOME CHDO funds for this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not used based on the conditions of federal funding. FISCAL IMPACT The HOME CHDO Program funds for the proposed Habitat single-family housing project are appropriated in the 2024 Planning and Development Department fiscal year Budget. Attachements: Exhibit A - HOME CHDO Agreement Exhibit B - Project Location Maps City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit “A” HOME CHDO Agreement Recorded at the Request of and When Recorded Return to: City of Fresno City Clerk’s Office 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2133 Fresno, CA 93721-3603 (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY) This HOME CHDO Agreement is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Fresno and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code Section 6103 CITY OF FRESNO By: Georgeanne A. White City Manager Date: CITY OF FRESNO HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF FRESNO, a municipal corporation and Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc. a California Corporation regarding Single-Family House 64 E. Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706 APN: 477-123-06 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page RECITALS ............................................................................................................................ 1 ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................. 2 ARTICLE 2. TERMS OF THE LOAN ................................................................................... 5 ARTICLE 3. REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTIES OF DEVELOPER. ......................... 6 ARTICLE 4. WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS BY DEVELOPER. ................................... 7 ARTICLE 5. COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS OF THE DEVELOPER ......................... 12 ARTICLE 6. DISBURSEMENT OF HOME CHDO FUNDS ................................................ 14 ARTICLE 7. DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT ...................... 16 ARTICLE 8. OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT ............................................................... 21 ARTICLE 9. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY AND BONDS .............................................. 22 ARTICLE 10. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. ....................................................................... 27 ARTICLE 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS. ........................................................................... 29 Page 1 of 37 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM AGREEMENT This HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Community Housing Development Organization Agreement (Agreement) is entered into on September _____, 2023, by and between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, acting through its Planning and Development Department - Housing and Community Development Division hereinafter referred to as the (CITY) and Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., a California corporation hereinafter referred to as the (DEVELOPER). RECITALS A. WHEREAS, the CITY has received a HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program grant which includes funds that are reserved for use of a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO), collectively here in referred to as (HOME CHDO) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (herein referred to as (HUD), under Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, as amended, herein referred to as the (Act). B. WHEREAS, to advance the supply of affordable housing within the City of Fresno, the CITY desires, among other things, to encourage investment in the affordable single-family housing market. C. WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER is a CITY-certified CHDO in accordance with HUD’s certification criteria of the developer for the project. D. WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER owns a vacant lot (the Property) located at 64 E. Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706, within the boundaries of the City of Fresno, as more particularly described in EXHIBIT “A” – Property Description and wishes to construct one new single-family house and related on-site and off-site improvements (hereinafter referred to as the Project), utilizing sweat-equity from the proposed homebuyers and volunteers. E. WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to act as the owner/developer exercising effective project control, as to the construction of one single-family house for a household whose income is up to 80% of the area medium income and will be preserved as Low- to Moderate-Income housing, as defined by the HOME Program, and related on-site and off-site improvements as more particularly described in EXHIBIT “B” – Project Description and Schedule, incorporated herein (Project). F. WHEREAS, the Project will be constructed upon HOME CHDO Program eligible Property (Property) owned by the DEVELOPER. G. WHEREAS, to further its goal to increase the supply of affordable housing within the City of Fresno, the CITY desires to assist the DEVELOPER by providing Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) in HOME CHDO Funding as an assumable loan for eligible HOME CHDO Project construction costs, upon the terms and conditions in this Agreement, as further identified in EXHIBIT “C” – Budget, variously to be secured by the underlying real Property and the Affordable Housing covenants attached as EXHIBIT “D” – Exemplar Declaration of Restriction, and Note, Exemplar Note attached as EXHIBIT “F” – Promissory Note loan, upon the terms and conditions in this Agreement. H. WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that it has ministerial authority to approve this Project, which is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Article 18, Statutory Exemptions, Section 15268 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, Developer Page 2 of 37 completed an environmental review of the Project pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidelines and received an Authorization to Use Grant Funds on January 20, 2023. I. WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that this Agreement is in the best interest of, and will materially contribute to, the Housing Element of the General Plan. Further, the CITY has found that the Project: (i) will have a positive influence in the neighborhood and surrounding environs, (ii) is in the vital and best interest of the CITY, and the health, safety, and welfare of CITY residents, (iii) complies with applicable federal, State, and local laws and requirements, (iv) will increase, improve, and preserve the community’s supply of Low- Income Housing available at an affordable cost to a Low-Income household, as defined hereunder, (v) planning and administrative expenses incurred in pursuit hereof are necessary for the production, improvement, or preservation of Lower Income Housing, and (vi) will comply with any and all owner participation rules and criteria applicable thereto. J. WHEREAS, the CITY and DEVELOPER have determined that the Project’s HOME-Assisted Unit constitutes routine programmatic/grantee lender activities utilizing available and allocated program/grantee funding, outside of the California Constitution Article XXXIV and enabling legislation. K. WHEREAS, the CITY and DEVELOPER acknowledge and agree that the obligations and liabilities of the DEVELOPER hereunder shall be joint and several unless and except to any extent expressly provided otherwise. L. WHEREAS, on June 30, 2022, the DEVELOPER’s Board reviewed and approved the development of the Project and HOME CHDO Application for funding. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the above recitals, which recitals are contractual in nature, the mutual promises herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration hereby acknowledge, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS The following terms have the meaning and content set forth in this Article wherever used in this Agreement, attached exhibits or attachments that are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. 1.1 Acquisition means vesting of the Property in fee title to the DEVELOPER. 1.2 ADA means the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, amended. 1.3 Affirmative Marketing means a good faith effort to attract eligible persons of all racial, ethnic and gender groups, in the housing market area, to sell the proposed Housing Unit proposed for construction on the eligible Property, as hereinafter defined. 1.4 Affordability Period means the minimum period of 30 years commencing from the date the CITY enters project completion information into HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS), which date will be provided to the DEVELOPER by the CITY and added as an administrative amendment hereto; CITY agrees to enter project completion information into IDIS within 30 days of CITY’s receipt thereof. 1.5 Affordable Housing Unit means the one for-sale housing unit which will be required to meet the affordability requirements of 24 C.F.R. 92.252. 1.6 Budget means the Budget for the development of the Project, as may be amended upon the approval of the CITY Housing and Community Development Division Page 3 of 37 provided any increase in HOME CHDO Funds hereunder requires City Council Approval, attached hereto as EXHIBIT “C”. 1.7 Certificate of Completion means that certificate issued, in the form attached as EXHIBIT “E” (Exemplar Certificate of Completion), to the DEVELOPER by the CITY evidencing completion of the Project and a release of construction related covenants for the purposes of the Agreement. 1.8 CFR means the Code of Federal Regulations. 1.9 Commencement of Construction means the time the DEVELOPER or the DEVELOPER’s construction contractor begins substantial physical work on the Property, including, without limitation, delivery of materials and any work, beyond maintenance of the Property in its status quo condition, which shall take place in accordance with the Project Schedule. 1.10 Completion Date means the date the City issues a recorded Certificate of Completion for the Project. 1.11 Declaration of Restrictions means the Declaration of Restrictions in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT “D”, which contains the affordability covenants and income level restrictions of this Agreement which shall run with the land and which the DEVELOPER shall record or cause to be recorded against the Property no later than the date of Commencement of Construction. 1.13 Deed of Trust means that standard form Deed of Trust approved by CITY recorded against the Property, insured in the full amount of the Loan on the Property. 1.14 Eligible Costs means the HOME CHDO eligible construction costs funded by the HOME CHDO Loan, consistent with the Project Budget attached as EXHIBIT “C”, allowable under 24 CFR Part 92, as specified in 24 CFR 92.205 and 92.206, and not disallowed by 24 CFR 92.214, provided, however, that costs incurred in connection with any activity that is determined to be ineligible under the Program by HUD or the CITY shall not constitute Eligible Costs. 1.15 Event of Default shall have the meaning assigned to such term under Section 10.1 hereunder. 1.16 Federal HOME CHDO Funds also referred to in this Agreement as “HOME Funds” or “HOME CHDO Program Funds”, means the federal Program monies consisting of the Loan, in an amount not to exceed the sum of Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) to be used for eligible Project construction costs. 1.17 Funding Sources means the CITY’s HOME CHDO Funds, conventional construction loan, Habitat for Humanity funds any other funds that may become available to the Project. 1.18 Hazardous Materials means any hazardous or toxic substances, materials, wastes, pollutants or contaminants which are defined, regulated or listed as "hazardous substances," "hazardous wastes," "hazardous materials," "pollutants," "contaminants" or "toxic substances" under federal or State environmental and health safety laws and regulations, including without limitation, petroleum and petroleum byproducts, flammable explosives, urea formaldehyde insulation, radioactive materials, asbestos and lead. Hazardous Materials do not include substances that are used or consumed in the normal Page 4 of 37 course of developing, operating, or occupying a housing project, to the extent and degree that such substances are stored, used and disposed of in the manner and in amounts that are consistent with normal practice and legal standards. 1.19 Household means those persons, related or unrelated, who occupying the Unit within the Project. 1.20 HOME CHDO - assisted Unit means the one housing unit required to meet the affordability requirements of 24 CFR 92.252 and preserved as affordable housing for the duration of the 30-year affordability period. 1.21 HUD means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1.22 Loan means the Project Loan of HOME Funds, in the total amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,653.00), the aggregate HOME CHDO per unit cap (24 CFR 92.250), as amended, for the one HOME-assisted Units as determined by the CITY and made available by the CITY to the Project pursuant to this Agreement, as more specifically described in the Budget and in the Promissory Note attached as EXHIBIT “F“. The Loan shall be payable in accordance with the terms of the Note, shall be secured by a deed of trust on the parcel constituting the Property, and shall be subject to the Deed of Trust attached as EXHIBIT “G“. 1.23 Loan Documents means collectively this Agreement, Promissory Note - EXHIBIT “F”, Deed of Trust – EXHIBIT “G”, and Declaration of Restrictions – EXHIBIT “D”, attached hereto and all related documents/instruments as they may be amended, modified or restated from time to time along with all exhibits and attachments thereto, relative to the Loan. 1.24 Low or Lower-Income Household means Households whose annual income does not exceed 80% of the area median income for Fresno, California as determined by HUD. 1.25 Note means that certain Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) HOME CHDO Loan Note in a principal amount not to exceed the HOME Program per unit cap (24 CFR 92.250), as amended, and as determined by the CITY, given by the DEVELOPER as promisor, in favor of the CITY as promisee, evidencing the Loan and performance of the affordability and other covenants and restrictions set forth in this Agreement, secured by the Deed of Trust as no worse than 2nd position lien upon the Property, naming the CITY as beneficiary and provided to the CITY, no later than the date of the Project funding hereunder, an exemplar of which is attached hereto as EXHIBIT “F“, and incorporated herein, as well as any amendments to, modifications of and restatements of said Note consented to by the CITY. 1.27 Program Income has the meaning provided in the HOME Program including 24 CFR 92.503. 1.28 Project Schedule means the schedule for commencement and completion of the Project included in EXHIBIT “B”. 1.29 Project Unit means the construction of one for sale housing unit which will be preserved as HOME CHDO-assisted Unit. 1.30 Property means the property located at 64 Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93727, APN: 477-123-06 as more specifically described in the Property Description attached Page 5 of 37 to EXHIBIT “A”. 1.31 Senior Financing means the financing for the Project set forth on the Budget and Finance Plan which shall be senior to the HOME CHDO Loan. 1.32 Senior Lender means lenders providing the Senior Financing for the Affordable Project. 1.33 Very Low Income means, for the purpose of this Agreement, those whose annual income does not exceed 50% of the area median income for Fresno, California as determined by HUD. ARTICLE 2. TERMS OF THE LOAN 2.1 Loan of HOME CHDO Funds. The CITY agrees to provide a loan of HOME CHDO Funds to the DEVELOPER in an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00), all under the terms and conditions provided in this Agreement. 2.2 Loan Documents. The DEVELOPER shall execute and deliver the Loan Documents including the Promissory Note to the CITY, and notarized Deed of Trust to First American Title Company for recordation against the Property, as provided for in this Agreement. 2.3 Term of Agreement. This Agreement is effective upon the date of full execution and shall remain in force with respect to the Project for the duration of the Affordability Period unless earlier terminated as provided herein. After the 30-year Affordability Period, this Agreement will expire. It is understood and agreed upon, however, that if for any reason this Agreement should be terminated in whole or in part as provided hereunder, without default, the CITY agrees to record a Notice of Cancellation regarding this Agreement upon the written request of the DEVELOPER. 2.4 Loan Repayment and Maturity. The Loan will be due and payable in accordance with the Note and not later than the Maturity date provided in the Note. 2.5 Incorporation of Documents. The DEVELOPER’s HOME CHDO application dated June 29, 2022 the CITY Council approved Minutes of _________, approving this Agreement, the Loan Documents, the Act and HUD regulations at 24 CFR Parts 85 (administrative requirements), HOME CHDO Program requirements, CPD 98-2 (cost allocations requirements) and all exhibits, attachments, documents and instruments referenced herein, as now in effect and as may be amended from time to time, constitute part of this Agreement and are incorporated herein by reference. All such documents have been provided to the parties herewith or have been otherwise provided to/procured by the parties and reviewed by each of them prior to execution hereof. 2.6 Covenants of DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER for itself and its agents/assigns covenants and agrees to comply with all the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the requirements of 24 CFR Part 92, as amended. 2.7 Subordination. This Agreement, Declaration of Restrictions, and Deed of Trust may be subordinated to certain approved financing (in each case, a “Senior Lender”), to no worse than 2nd position, but only on condition that all of the following are satisfied: (a) All of the proceeds of the proposed Senior Loan, less any transaction costs, must be used to provide construction financing for the Project consistent with an approved financing plan; (b) the subordination agreement must provide the CITY with adequate rights to cure any defaults Page 6 of 37 by the DEVELOPER including providing the CITY or its successor with copies of any notices of default; (c) upon a determination by the City Manager that the conditions in this Section have been satisfied, the City Manager or his/her designee will be authorized to execute the approved subordination agreement, inter-creditor agreements, standstill agreements, and/or other documents as may be reasonably requested by the Lender to evidence subordination to the Project financing, without the necessity of any further action or approval provided that such agreements contain written provisions that are no more onerous and which are consistent with the customary standard requirements imposed by the financing source(s), on subordinate cash flow obligations under their then existing senior financing policies, and further provided that the City Attorney approves such document(s) as to form. The HOME CHDO Program restrictions on the Property shall terminate upon foreclosure, transfer in lieu of foreclosure or assignment of the FHA insured mortgage to HUD. To the extent that there are any proceeds from the foreclosure or other sale of the Property remaining after the superior loan repayment, the remaining proceeds shall be paid to City of Fresno. ARTICLE 3. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF DEVELOPER 3.1 Existence and Qualification. The DEVELOPER, represents and warrants to the CITY as of the date hereof, that the DEVELOPER is in good standing with the State of California; the DEVELOPER has the requisite power, right, and legal authority to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under the HOME CHDO Agreement and has taken all actions necessary to authorize the execution, delivery, performance, and observance of its obligations under this Agreement. This Agreement, when executed and delivered by the DEVELOPER enforceable against the DEVELOPER in accordance with its respective terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by: (a) bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent conveyance, reorganization, moratorium, or other similar laws of general applicability affecting the enforcement of creditors' rights generally, and (b) the application of general principles of equity without the joinder of any other party. 3.2 No Litigation Material to Financial Condition. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY as of the date hereof that, except as disclosed to and approved by the CITY in writing, no litigation or administrative proceeding before any court or governmental body or agency is now pending, nor, to the best of the DEVELOPER’s knowledge, is any such litigation or proceeding now threatened, or anticipated against the DEVELOPER that, if adversely determined, would have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, business, or assets of the DEVELOPER or on the operation of the Project. 3.3 No Conflict of Interest. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY as of the date hereof that it is an independent governmental agency and no officer, agent, or employee of the CITY directly or indirectly owns or controls any interest in the DEVELOPER, and no person, directly or indirectly owning or controlling any interest in the DEVELOPER, is an official, officer, agent, or employee of the CITY. 3.4 No Legal Bar. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY, as of the date hereof that the execution, delivery, performance, or observance by the DEVELOPER of this Agreement will not, to the best of the DEVELOPER’s knowledge, materially violate or contravene any provisions of: (a) any existing law or regulation, or any order of decree of any court, governmental authority, bureau, or agency; (b) governing documents and instruments of the DEVELOPER; or (c) any mortgage, indenture, security agreement, contract, undertaking, or other agreement or instrument to which the Page 7 of 37 DEVELOPER is a party or that is binding on any of its properties or assets, the result of which would materially or substantially impair the DEVELOPER’s ability to perform and discharge its obligations or its ability to complete the Project under this Agreement. 3.5 No Violation of Law. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY as of the date hereof that, to the best of the DEVELOPER’s knowledge, this Agreement and the operation of the Project as contemplated by the DEVELOPER, do not violate any existing federal, State, or local laws of regulations. 3.6 No Litigation Material to Project. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY as of the date hereof, except as disclosed to, and approved by the CITY in writing, there is no action, proceeding, or investigation now pending, or any basis therefor known or believed to exist by the DEVELOPER that questions the validity of this Agreement, or of any action to be taken under this Agreement, that would, if adversely determined, materially or substantially impair the DEVELOPER’s ability to perform and observe its obligations under this Agreement, or that would either directly or indirectly have an adverse effect or impair the completion of the Project. 3.7 Assurance of Governmental Approvals and Licenses. The DEVELOPER represents and warrants to the CITY, as of the date hereof, that the DEVELOPER has obtained and, to the best of the DEVELOPER’s knowledge, is in compliance with all federal, State, and local governmental reviews, consents, authorizations, approvals, and licenses presently required by law to be obtained by the DEVELOPER for the Project as of the date hereof. ARTICLE 4. WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS OF THE DEVELOPER 4.1 Accessibility. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall comply with all federal regulations concerning accessibility requirements in federally funded housing, including, but not limited to Title III of the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA) as it relates to the homebuyer. 4.2 Universal Design Ordinance. The design and construction requirements as required by the CITY’s Universal Design Ordinance pursuant to FMC 11-110, including, but not limited to the following requirements: i. No step accessible entryway; ii. All interior doorways and passageways at least 32 inches wide; iii. One downstairs “flex room” and accessible bathroom with reinforcements for grab bars; iv. Six square feet of accessible kitchen counter space; and v. Hallways at least 42 inches wide. 4.3 Affirmative Marketing. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees that it shall comply with all affirmative marketing requirements, including without limitation, those set out at 24 C.F.R. 92.350 and 92.351, in order to provide information and otherwise attract eligible persons from all racial, ethnic and gender groups in the housing market. The DEVELOPER shall be responsible for complying with its "Affirmative Marketing Policy”, in addition to the CITY’s Minority Outreach Program. The DEVELOPER shall maintain records of actions taken to affirmatively market units constructed in the future, and to assess the results of these actions. 4.4 Availability of HOME CHDO Funds. The DEVELOPER understands and Page 8 of 37 agrees that the availability of HOME Funds is subject to the control of HUD, or other federal agencies, and should said Funds be encumbered, withdrawn or otherwise made unavailable to the CITY, whether earned by or promised to the DEVELOPER, and/or should the CITY in any fiscal year hereunder fail to allocate Funds to the Project, the CITY shall not provide said Funds unless and until Funds are allocated to the CITY by HUD. No other funds owned or controlled by the CITY shall be obligated under this Agreement. 4.5 Compliance with Agreement. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees that, in accordance with the requirements of 24 CFR 92.252 and 24 CFR Part 85, upon any uncured default by the DEVELOPER within the meaning of Article 10.1 of this Agreement, the CITY may suspend or terminate this Agreement and all other agreements with the DEVELOPER without waiver or limitation of rights/remedies otherwise available to the CITY. 4.6 Conflict of Interest. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees that it shall comply with the Conflict-of-Interest requirements of 24 CFR 92.356 including, without limitation, that no officer, employee, agent, or consultant of the DEVELOPER may occupy a Project Unit. The DEVELOPER understands and acknowledges that no employee, agent, consultant, officer or elected official or appointed official of the CITY, who exercises any functions or responsibilities with respect to the Project, or who is in a position to participate in a decision making process or gain inside information with regard to these activities, may obtain a financial interest or benefit from the Project, or have an interest in any contract, subcontract or agreement with respect thereto, or the proceeds thereunder, either for him or herself or for anyone with which that person has family or business ties, during his or her tenure or for one year thereafter. To the extent provided at 24 C.F.R. 92.356(f), no owner, developer or sponsor of the Project, or officer, employee, agent, or consultant thereof, may occupy a Project Unit. 4.7 Construction Standards. The DEVELOPER shall construct the proposed Project Units in compliance with all applicable local codes, ordinances, and zoning requirements in effect at the time of issuance of CITY building permits. 4.8 Covenants and Restrictions to Run with the Land. The CITY and the DEVELOPER expressly warrant, covenant and agree to ensure that the covenants and restrictions set forth in this Agreement are recorded and will run with the land, provided, however, that, on expiration of this Agreement such covenants and restrictions shall expire, provided that such agreements contain written provisions that are no more onerous and which are consistent with the customary standard requirements imposed by the financing source(s), on subordinate cash flow obligations under their then existing senior financing policies, and further provided that City Attorney approves such document(s) as to form. A. The CITY and the DEVELOPER hereby declare their understanding and intent that the covenants and restrictions set forth herein directly benefit the land by: (a) enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and ownership of the proposed Project by a certain Lower Income Household, and (b) making possible the obtaining of advantageous financing for construction. B. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that after issuance of a recorded Certification of Completion for the Project until the expiration of the Affordability Period it shall cause one HOME CHDO-Assisted Unit to be sold to a Low- to Moderate-Income household. C. Without waiver or limitation, the CITY shall be entitled to injunctive or Page 9 of 37 other equitable relief against any violation or attempted violation of any covenants and restrictions, and shall, in addition, be entitled to damages available under law or contract for any injuries or losses resulting from any violations thereof. D. All present and future owners of the Property and other persons claiming by, through, or under them shall be subject to and shall comply with the covenants and restrictions. The acceptance of a deed of conveyance to the Property shall constitute an agreement that the covenants and restrictions, as may be amended or supplemented from time to time, are accepted and ratified by such future owners, tenant or occupant, and all such covenants and restrictions shall be covenants running with the land and shall bind any person having at any time any interest or estate in the Property, all as though such covenants and restrictions were recited and stipulated at length in each and every deed, conveyance, mortgage or lease thereof. E. The failure or delay at any time of the CITY or any other person entitled to enforce any such covenants or restrictions shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the same, or of the right to enforce the same at any time or from time to time thereafter, or an estoppel against the enforcement thereof. 4.9 Displacement of Persons. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that pursuant to 24 CFR 92.353, it will take all reasonable steps to minimize the displacement of any persons (families, individuals, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and farms). The parties acknowledge and agree that the Property located 64 Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706 is vacant land and is not occupied. 4.10 Initial and Annual Income Certification and Reporting. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall comply with the procedures for annual income determination at 24 CFR 92.203. The DEVELOPER, shall obtain, complete and maintain on file, immediately prior to initial occupancy, and annually thereafter, income certifications from the Project Unit Household members. The DEVELOPER, shall make a good faith effort to verify that the income provided by an applicant or occupying Household in an income certification is accurate by taking one or more of the following steps as part of the verification process: (1) obtain a pay stub for the three most recent pay periods; (2) obtain an income verification form from the applicant’s current employer; (3) obtain an income verification form from the Social Security Administration and California Department of Social Services if the applicant receives assistance from either of such agencies; (4) obtain income tax return for the most recent three (3) years; or (5) if the applicant is unemployed, obtain another form of independent verification. Copies of Household income certification and verification must be available for review and approval by the CITY prior to the initial sale of the house to the homebuyer. The DEVELOPER further warrants, covenants and agrees that it will cooperate with the CITY in the CITY’s annual income certification monitoring. 4.11 Lead-Based Paint. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act of 42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq., 24 CFR Part 35, including the HUD 1012 Rule, and 24 CFR 982.401(j), and any amendment thereto, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Section 402 (c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to address lead-based hazards created by renovation, repair, and painting activities that disturb lead-based paint in target housing and child-occupied facilities. Contractors performing renovations in lead- based paint units must be EPA-certified renovators. These requirements apply to all units and common areas of the Project. The DEVELOPER shall incorporate or cause Page 10 of 37 incorporation of this provision in all contracts and subcontracts for work performed on the Project, which involve the application of paint. The DEVELOPER shall be responsible for all disclosure, inspection, testing, evaluation, and control and abatement activities. 4.12 Minority Outreach Activities. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall comply with all federal laws and regulations described in Subpart H of 24 CFR Part 92, including, without limitation, any requirement that the DEVELOPER comply with the CITY’s minority outreach program. 4.13 Other Laws and Regulations. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that, in addition to complying with the federal laws and regulations already cited in this Agreement, the DEVELOPER has reviewed, and shall comply with and require all its contractors and subcontractors on the Project to comply with, all other federal laws and regulations that apply to the HOME Program, including, without limitation, requirements of 24 CFR 58.6 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4001- 4128) and the following: A. The DEVELOPER does not intend to use any financing that is secured by a mortgage insured by HUD in connection with the Project as part of its land acquisition and construction costs of the Project. B. The Project is not located in a tract identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as having special flood requirements. C. The Project requirements, Subpart F of 24 C.F.R. Part 92, as applicable and in accordance with the type of Project assisted, including, but not limited to, the HOME per-unit subsidy amount at 24 CFR 92.250, as amended. D. The property standards at 24 CFR 92.251. E. The Project “Labor” requirements, as applicable, of 24 C.F.R. 92.354 including Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements (40 U.S.C. 276a - 276a-7), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5). F. The provisions of Section 102 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-333), as supplemented by Department of Labor Regulations (29 CFR Part 5), regarding the construction and management of the proposed Project. G. The DEVELOPER and its contractors, subcontractors and service providers for the Project, shall comply with all applicable local, State and federal requirements concerning equal employment opportunity, including compliance with Executive Order (E.O.) 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity”, as amended by E.O. 11375, (amending E.O. 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity), and as supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR chapter 60, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor”. H. The provisions of the Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (18 U.S.C. 874), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 3, “Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States”). I. The provisions of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as amended. Page 11 of 37 J. The provisions of the Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352). K. The provision of E.O.s 12549 and 12689, “Debarment and Suspension,” as set forth at 24 CFR part 24. L. The provisions of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 701), in accordance with the Act and with HUD's rules at 24 CFR part 24, subpart F. M. Title 8 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 PL. 90-284. N. E.O. 11063 on Equal Opportunity and Housing. O. Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968. P. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Q. Clean Water Requirements 33 U.S.C. 1251. R. Civil Rights Requirements, 29 U.S.C. 623, 42 U.S.C. 2000, 42 U.S.C. 6102, 42 U.S.C 12112, 42 U.S.C. 12132, 49 U.S.C 5332, 29 C.F.R. Part 1630, 41 C.F.R. and Part 60 et seq. S. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), 24 CFR 92.359 and 24 CFR 92.504(c)(3)(v)(F), including but not limited to notice requirements, obligations under emergency transfer plan, bifurcation of lease requirements, imposition of requirements for the duration of the HOME CHDO period of affordability, and inclusion of VAWA lease addendum requirements. T. Broadband infrastructure requirements for new housing and rehabilitation projects as set forth in 24 CRF 92.251. 4.14 Faith Based Activities. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall not engage in any prohibited activities described in 24 CFR 92.257. 4.15 Reporting Requirements. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees with the CITY that it shall submit performance reports to the CITY as detailed in Section 7.15. Furthermore, the DEVELOPER agrees to provide, at the sole cost of the DEVELOPER, an annual audited Financial Statement for the Project expenses and ongoing financial transactions which occur as a result of this Agreement as detailed in Section 5.4. The DEVELOPER agrees to account for the expenditure of HOME CHDO Funds using generally accepted accounting principles, which financial documentation shall be made available to the CITY and HUD upon their respective written request(s). 4.16 Housing Affordability. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees with the CITY that the Project Unit will be HOME CHDO-assisted available to a Low- to Moderate Income household and other requirements of 24 CFR 92.252 during the Affordability Period and be available for sale to and occupied by a household whose annual household income at the time of initial occupancy is not greater than 80% of the most recent annual median income calculated and published by HUD for the Fresno Metropolitan Statistical Area applicable to such household’s size consistent with HOME CHDO Program regulations, for the Affordability Period except upon foreclosure or other transfer in lieu of foreclosure following default under a Deed of Trust. However, if at any time following a transfer by foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure, but still during the Affordability Period, the owner of record prior to the foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure, or any newly formed entity that includes such owner of record those whom such owner of record has or had business ties, obtains an ownership interest in the Project or the Property, the Affordability Period shall be revived Page 12 of 37 according to its original terms. In the event the DEVELOPER fails to comply with this Section or the Affordability Period is not revived following transfer by foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure, the DEVELOPER shall return to the CITY all HOME CHDO Funds disbursed to the DEVELOPER by the CITY. 4.17 Terminated Project. The DEVELOPER understands and agrees that, if the Project is terminated before completion, either voluntarily or otherwise, such constitutes an ineligible activity and the CITY will not be required to provide any further HOME CHDO Program assistance to the Project. ARTICLE 5. COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS OF DEVELOPER The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees to the following, for the entire term of the Agreement. 5.1 Affordable Rental Housing. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees that the Affordable Project shall constitute one Affordable Housing Unit for sale and preserved for a Low- to Moderate-Income Household during the 30-year affordability period. In the event the DEVELOPER fails to comply with the time period in which the Affordable Housing Unit constitutes Affordable Housing, the CITY shall without waiver or limitation, be entitled to injunctive relief, as the DEVELOPER acknowledges that the damages are not adequate remedy at law for such breach. 5.2 Compliance With Environmental Laws. The DEVELOPER shall cause the Project to be in compliance with, and not to cause or permit the Project to be in violation of, any Hazardous Materials law, rule, regulation, ordinance, or statute. If the CITY has reasonable grounds to suspect any such violation, the DEVELOPER shall be provided with 30 days' notice and opportunity to cure such violation. If the suspected violation is not cured, the CITY shall have the right to retain an independent consultant to inspect and test the eligible Property for such violation. If a violation is discovered, the DEVELOPER shall pay for the reasonable cost of the independent consultant. Additionally, the DEVELOPER agrees: A. That the CITY shall not be directly or indirectly responsible, obligated or liable with the inspection, testing, removal or abatement of asbestos or other hazardous or toxic chemicals, materials, substances, or wastes and that all cost, expense and liability for such work shall be and remain solely with the DEVELOPER; B. Not to transport to, or from, the proposed Property, or use, generate, manufacture, produce, store, release, discharge, or dispose of on, under, or about the Property, or surrounding real estate, or transport to or from the Project site(s), or surrounding real estate, any hazardous or toxic chemicals, materials, substance, or wastes or allow any person or entity to do so except in such amounts and under such terms and conditions permitted by applicable laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes; C. To give prompt written notice to the CITY of the following: 1. Any proceeding or inquiry by any governmental authority with respect to the presence of any hazardous or toxic chemicals, materials, substance, or waste in or on the eligible Property or the surrounding real estate or the migration thereof from or to other property; and 2. All claims made or threatened by any third party against the DEVELOPER, or such properties relating to any loss or injury resulting from any hazardous Page 13 of 37 or toxic chemicals, materials, substance, or waste; and 3. The DEVELOPER’s discovery of any occurrence or condition on any real property adjoining or in the vicinity of such properties that would cause such properties or underlying or surrounding real estate or part thereof to be subject to any restrictions on the ownership, occupancy, transferability, or use of the property under any environmental law, rule, regulation, ordinance or statute; and 4. To indemnify, defend, and hold the CITY harmless from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demand, judgments, damages, injuries, administrative orders, consent agreements, orders, liabilities, penalties, costs, expenses (including attorney’s fees and expenses), and disputes of any kind whatsoever arising out of or relating to the DEVELOPER or any other party’s use of release of any hazardous or toxic chemicals, materials, substance, or waste on the Property regardless of cause or origin, including any and all liability arising out of or relating to any investigation, site monitoring, containment, cleanup, removal, restoration, or related remedial work of any kind or nature. 5.3 Existence, Qualification, and Authority. The DEVELOPER shall provide to the CITY any evidence required or requested by the CITY to demonstrate the continuing existence, qualification, and authority of the DEVELOPER to execute this Agreement and to perform the acts necessary to carry out the Project. 5.4 Financial Statements and Audits. The DEVELOPER, is required to comply with the provisions of the Single Audit Act of 1984 (31 U.S.C. Sections 7501 et seq.), as amended. 5.5 Inspection and Audit of Books, Records and Documents. The DEVELOPER shall be accountable to the CITY for all HOME CHDO Funds disbursed for the Project pursuant to this Agreement. Any duly authorized representative of the CITY or HUD shall, at all reasonable times, have access to and the right to inspect, copy, make excerpts or transcripts, audit, and examine all books of accounts, records, files and other papers or property, and other documents of the DEVELOPER pertaining to the Project or all matters covered in this Agreement and for up to six years after the expiration or termination of this Agreement. A. The DEVELOPER agrees to maintain books and records that accurately and fully show the date, amount, purpose and payee of all expenditures financed with HOME CHDO Funds and to keep all invoices, receipts and other documents related to expenditures financed with HOME CHDO Funds for not less than six years after the expiration or termination of the Agreement. Financial books and records must be kept accurate and current. For purposes of this section, "books, records and documents" include, without limitation; plans, drawings, specifications, ledgers, journals, statements, contracts/agreements, funding information, funding applications, purchase orders, invoices, loan documents, computer printouts, correspondence, memoranda, and electronically stored versions of the foregoing. This section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. B. The CITY may audit any conditions relating to this Agreement at the CITY’s expense, unless such audit shows a significant discrepancy in information reported by the DEVELOPER in which case the DEVELOPER shall bear the cost of such audit. The DEVELOPER shall also comply with any applicable audit requirements of 24 C.F.R. 92.506. This section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. C. The DEVELOPER will cooperate fully with the CITY and HUD in Page 14 of 37 connection with any interim or final audit relating to the Project that may be performed relative to the performance of this Agreement. 5.6 Inspection of Property. Any duly authorized representative of the CITY or HUD shall, at all reasonable times, have access and the right to inspect the Property. 5.7 No Other Liens. The DEVELOPER shall not create or incur, or suffer to be created or incurred, or to exist, any additional mortgage, pledge, encumbrance, lien, charge, or other security interest of any kind on the eligible Property, other than those related to the Project’s construction loans in relation to the Project without the prior written consent of the CITY. 5.8 Nondiscrimination. The DEVELOPER shall comply with and cause any and all contractors and subcontractors to comply with any and all federal, State, and local laws with regard to illegal discrimination, and the DEVELOPER shall not illegally discriminate against any persons on account of race, religion, sex, family status, age, handicap, or place of national origin in its performance of this Agreement and the completion of the Project. 5.9 Ownership. Except as set forth herein, or pursuant to the DEVELOPER’s sale of the Affordable Housing unit through escrow to an eligible Low- to Moderate-Income homebuyer, the DEVELOPER shall not sell, transfer, assign or otherwise dispose of all or any material part of any interest it might hold in the Property or the Project to the homebuyer with the prior written consent of the CITY through escrow documents, which consent and execution of escrow document shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 5.10 Payment of Liabilities. The DEVELOPER shall pay and discharge in the ordinary course of its business all material obligations and liabilities, the nonpayment of which could have a material or adverse impact on its financial condition, business, or assets or on the operation of the Project(s), except such obligations and liabilities that have been disclosed to the CITY in writing and are being contested in good faith. 5.11 Report of Events of Default. The DEVELOPER shall promptly give written notice to the CITY upon becoming aware of any Event of Default under this Agreement. ARTICLE 6. DISBURSEMENT OF HOME CHDO FUNDS Without waiver of limitations, the CITY and DEVELOPER agree as follows, regarding the disbursement of HOME CHDO funds: 6.1 Loan Commitments and Financing Plan. The DEVELOPER shall submit its most current Finance Plan for the Project to the CITY prior to Council approval and as other funding sources become part of the Project budget. The City shall approve the Finance Plan so long as the Plan is consistent with the Budget contained in EXHIBIT “C”. The CITY shall accept the Finance Plan and supporting documentation such as commitment letters, letters of credit, agreements, and resolutions for proposed funding to the Project. If the CITY disapproves the Finance Plan, it will specify the reason for the disapproval and ask the DEVELOPER to provide any additional information the CITY may need to approve the Finance Plan. 6.2 Finance Plan Content. The Finance Plan shall contain all Project pre- construction, post-construction, and permanent loans or letters of commitment from one or more qualified public/private lenders or funding sources in sufficient amounts, combined with any other DEVELOPER financing, for the DEVELOPER to complete construction of the Page 15 of 37 Project. The total amount of the liens to be recorded against the Property as presented in the Finance Plan shall not exceed the DEVELOPER’s estimated construction Budget. 6.3 Use of HOME Funds. The DEVELOPER warrants, covenants and agrees that it shall request HOME CHDO Funds only for reimbursement of eligible construction costs incurred as identified in the itemized Budget, attached hereto as EXHIBIT “C”, including costs allowable under 24 CFR 92.206, aggregating not more than Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00). A. If any such Funds shall be determined to have been requested and/or used by the DEVELOPER for costs other than for eligible construction costs, and subject to the notice and cure provisions of Section 10.2 hereunder, an equal amount from nonpublic funds shall become immediately due and payable by the DEVELOPER to the CITY; provided, however, that the DEVELOPER shall, subject to its full cooperation with the CITY, be entitled to participate in any opportunity to remedy, contest, or appeal such determination. B. In the event HOME CHDO Funds are requested to reimburse Eligible Costs which subsequently lose eligibility as Eligible Costs, the DEVELOPER shall immediately return such HOME CHDO Funds to the CITY. C. The CITY will disburse HOME CHDO Funds to the DEVELOPER through proper invoicing for eligible construction costs of the HOME CHDO-assisted Unit as provided in this Article 6. 6.4 Conditions Precedent to Disbursement. The CITY shall not be obligated to make or authorize any disbursements of HOME CHDO Funds unless the following conditions are satisfied: A. There exists no Event of Default as provided in Article 10, nor any act, failure, omission or condition that with the passage of time or the giving of notice or both would constitute an Event of Default. B. The DEVELOPER has received and delivered to the CITY firm commitments of, or Agreements for, sufficient funds to finance the Project. C. The CITY has approved the requested reimbursement of eligible Project construction costs. D. The DEVELOPER has obtained insurance coverage and delivered to the City for approval as evidence of insurance as required in Article 9. E. The DEVELOPER is current with its compliance of reporting requirements set forth in this Agreement. F. The DEVELOPER has provided the CITY with a written request for HOME CHDO Funds for reimbursement of eligible Project construction costs and detailing such Eligible Costs applicable to the request on a City provided form. G. The CITY has received certification required by Section 6.6 of this Agreement. H. The CITY has received, and continues to the have the right to disburse, HOME CHDO Funds. 6.5 Requests for Reimbursement of Funds. The DEVELOPER shall request that the CITY reimburse funds for eligible construction cost using the CITY’s Request for Page 16 of 37 Disbursement of Funds form. The DEVELOPER shall only request a maximum of Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) in HOME CHDO Program assistance for the HOME CHDO-assisted unit. All requests should provide in detail such Eligible Costs applicable to the request. All requests for HOME CHDO Funds shall be accompanied with the Certification required by Section 6.6 of this Agreement. 6.6 DEVELOPER Certification. The DEVELOPER shall submit to the CITY a written certification that, as of the date of the Request for Reimbursement (Certification): A. The representations and warranties contained in or incorporated by reference in this Agreement continue to be true, complete and accurate in material respects. B. The DEVELOPER has carried out its obligations and is in compliance with all the obligations or covenants specified in this Agreement, to the extent that such obligations or covenants are required to have been carried out or are applicable at the time of the Request for Reimbursement; and C. The DEVELOPER has not committed or suffered an act, event, occurrence, or circumstance that constitutes an Event of Default or that with the passage of time or giving of notice or both would constitute an Event of Default; and D. The disbursement of funds shall be used solely for reimbursement of Eligible construction Costs identified in this Agreement and must by supported by the itemized obligations that have been properly incurred, expended and are properly chargeable in connection with construction of the Project. 6.7 Disbursement of Funds. The disbursement of HOME CHDO Program Loan Funds shall occur within the normal course of CITY business (approximately 30 days) after the CITY receives the Certification and Request for Reimbursement with correct supporting documentation and to the extent of annually allocated and available HOME CHDO Funds. ARTICLE 7. DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT Without waiver of limitation, the parties agree as follows: 7.1 Pre-Construction Meeting Regarding HOME CHDO Program Processes and Procedures. The CITY may schedule, and the DEVELOPER shall attend, a meeting prior to construction for the purpose of outlining the Project processes and procedures or the DEVELOPER may schedule, and the CITY shall attend, a meeting prior to the construction for the purpose of outlining the Project processes and procedures. 7.2 Commencement and Completion of Project. The DEVELOPER shall commence construction of the Project, and when completed, record a Notice of Completion of construction of the Project in accordance with the Project Schedule as identified in EXHIBIT “B”, and provide the CITY with a copy of the recordation. 7.3 Contracts and Subcontracts. Consistent with Section 5.2, all hazardous waste abatement, construction work and professional services for the Project shall be performed by persons or entities licensed or otherwise legally authorized to perform the applicable work or service in the State of California and the City of Fresno. The DEVELOPER shall provide the CITY with copies of all agreements it has entered into with any and all general contractors or subcontractors for this Project. The DEVELOPER shall require that each such general contractor agreement contain a provision whereby the party(ies) to the agreement, other than Page 17 of 37 the DEVELOPER, agree to: (i) notify the CITY immediately of any event of default by the DEVELOPER thereunder, (ii) notify the CITY immediately of the filing of a mechanic’s lien, (iii) notify the CITY immediately of termination or cancellation of the construction agreement on the Project, and (iv) provide the CITY, upon the CITY’s request, an Estoppel Certificate certifying that the agreement is in full force and effect and the DEVELOPER is not in default thereunder. The DEVELOPER agrees to notify the CITY immediately of termination or cancellation of any such agreement(s), notice of filing of a mechanic’s lien, or breach or default by other party(ies) thereto. 7.4 Damage to Property. To the extent consistent with the requirements of any permitted encumbrance, or as otherwise approved by the CITY, and subject to Article 9 of this Agreement, if any building or improvement constructed on the Property is damaged or destroyed by an insurable cause, the DEVELOPER shall, at its cost and expense, diligently undertake to repair or restore said buildings and improvements consistent with the original Plans and Specifications of the Project. Such work or repair shall occur within 90 days after the insurance proceeds are made available to the DEVELOPER and shall be completed within two years thereafter. All insurance proceeds collected for such damage or destruction shall be applied to the cost of such repairs or restoration and, if such insurance proceeds shall be insufficient for such purpose, the DEVELOPER shall use its best efforts to make up the deficiency. 7.5 Fees, Taxes and Other Levies. The DEVELOPER shall be responsible for payment of all fees, assessments, taxes, charges, and levies imposed by any public authority or utility company with respect to the Property or the Project and shall pay such charges prior to delinquency. However, the DEVELOPER shall not be required to pay and discharge any such charge so long as: (a) the legality thereof is being contested diligently and in good faith and by appropriate proceedings, and (b) if requested by the CITY, the DEVELOPER deposits with the CITY any funds or other forms of assurances that the CITY, in good faith, may determine from time to time are appropriate to protect the CITY from the consequences of the contest being unsuccessful. The DEVELOPER shall have the right to apply for and obtain an abatement and/or exemption of the Project from real property taxes in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations, including Section 214(g) of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. 7.6 Financing. The DEVELOPER shall promptly inform the CITY of any new financing or funding not included in the budget for the Project, and the DEVELOPER shall provide the CITY with copies of all agreements with all funding sources for the Project. The DEVELOPER shall require each agreement with all funding sources not included in the Budget to contain a provision whereby the party(ies) to the agreement other than the DEVELOPER, if permitted by the party(ies) applicable rules and regulations, agree to notify the CITY immediately of any event of default by the DEVELOPER thereunder. Should the DEVELOPER not comply with all the obligations of this section, the Loan shall become immediately due and payable as provided for in this Agreement. This Section shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 7.7 Identification Signage. Before the start of construction, the DEVELOPER shall place a poster or sign, with a minimum four feet by four feet in size, identifying the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division as a Project participant. The sign shall also include the CITY’s Housing logo, as well as the Equal Housing Opportunity logo, as mandated by HUD. The font size shall be a minimum of 4 inches. The poster/sign shall be appropriately placed and shall remain in place Page 18 of 37 throughout the Project construction. 7.8 Inspections. The DEVELOPER shall permit, facilitate, and require its contractors and consultants to permit and facilitate observation and inspection at the Project site by the CITY and other public authorities during reasonable business hours, for the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement, including without limitation those annual on-site Property inspections required of the CITY by 24 CFR 92.504(d). 7.9 Utilities. The DEVELOPER shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, to determine the location of any utilities on the Property and to negotiate with the utility companies for, and to relocate the utilities, if any, as necessary to complete the Project. 7.10 Insurance and Bonds. The DEVELOPER shall submit for CITY approval bonds, certificates and applicable endorsements for all insurance and bonds required by this Agreement in accordance with Article 9. 7.11 Mechanic’s Liens and Stop Notices. If any claim of lien is filed against the Property or a stop notice affecting any financing, HOME CHDO Program Funds or funding sources for the Project is served on the CITY or any other third party in connection with the Project, the DEVELOPER shall, within twenty (20) days of such filing or service, either pay and fully discharge the lien or stop notice, effect the release of such lien or stop notice by delivering to the CITY a surety bond in sufficient form and amount, or provide the CITY with other assurance satisfactory to the CITY that the claim of lien or stop notice will be paid or discharged. A. If the DEVELOPER fails to discharge, bond or otherwise satisfy the CITY with respect to any lien, encumbrance, charge or claim referred to in Section 7.11 above, then, in addition to any other right or remedy, the CITY may, but shall not be obligated to, discharge such lien, encumbrance, charge, or claim at the DEVELOPER’s expense. Alternatively, the CITY may require the DEVELOPER to immediately deposit with the CITY the amount necessary to satisfy such lien or claim and any costs, pending resolution thereof. The CITY may use such deposit to satisfy any claim or lien that is adversely determined against the DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless from liability for such liens, encumbrances, charges or claims together with all related costs and expenses. 7.12 Permits and Licenses. The DEVELOPER shall submit, for CITY approval, all the necessary permits and licenses required for Commencement of Construction. As the CITY may reasonably request, the DEVELOPER, at its sole cost and expense, shall provide to the CITY copies of any and all permit approvals and authorizations including plot plan, plat, zoning variances, sewer, building, grading, demolition, and other permits required by governmental authorities other than the CITY in pursuit of the Project, and for its stated purposes in accordance with all applicable building, environmental, ecological, landmark, subdivision, zoning codes, laws, and regulations. 7.13 Plans and Specifications. The DEVELOPER has submitted to the CITY preliminary plans and specifications for the Project under Zoning Clearance P22-02878 (Project Preliminary Plans). A. The HOME CHDO Agreement shall contain by reference the design and site plan of the Project; such design must be approved by the CITY Council with the HOME CHDO Agreement. Page 19 of 37 B. Before Commencement of Construction, the DEVELOPER shall submit to the CITY, for its review and approval, the final Plans and Specifications for the Project. The DEVELOPER will construct the Affordable Housing in full conformance with the Plans and Specifications and modifications thereto approved by the CITY. The DEVELOPER shall obtain the CITY’s prior written approval for any modifications to the Plans and Specifications. 7.14 Project Responsibilities/Public Work-Prevailing Wage Requirements. The DEVELOPER shall be solely responsible for all aspects of the DEVELOPER’s conduct in connection with the Project, including but not limited to, compliance with all local, State, and federal laws including without limitation, as to prevailing wage and public bidding requirements. The Council of the City of Fresno has adopted Resolution No. 82-297 ascertaining the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and per diem wages for holidays and overtime in the Fresno area for each craft, classification or type of workman needed in the execution of contracts for the CITY. A copy of the resolution is on file at the Office of the City Clerk, City Hall, second floor. Actual wage schedules are available upon request at the City’s Construction Management Office, 1721 Van Ness Avenue. Without limiting the foregoing, the DEVELOPER shall be solely responsible for the quality and suitability of the work completed and the supervision of all contracted work, qualifications, and financial conditions of and performance of all contracts, subcontractors, consultants, and suppliers. Any review or inspection undertaken by the CITY with reference to the Project and/or payroll monitoring/auditing is solely for the purpose of determining whether the DEVELOPER is properly discharging its obligation to the CITY and shall not be relied upon by the DEVELOPER or by any third parties as a warranty or representation by the CITY as to governmental compliance and/or the quality of work completed for the Project. 7.15 Property Condition. The DEVELOPER shall maintain the Project and all improvements on site in a reasonably good condition and repair (and, as to landscaping, in a healthy condition), all according to the basic design and related plans, as amended from time to time. The DEVELOPER and those taking direction under the DEVELOPER shall: (i) maintain all on-site improvements according to all other applicable law, rules, governmental agencies and bodies having or claiming jurisdiction and all their respective departments, bureaus, and officials; (ii) keep the improvements free from graffiti; (iii) keep the Project Property free from any accumulation of debris or waste material; (iv) promptly make repairs and replacements to on-site improvements; (iv) promptly replace any dead, or diseased plants and/or landscaping (if any) with comparable materials, and (v) enforce tenant lease terms. 7.16 Quality of Work. The DEVELOPER shall ensure that construction of the Project employs building materials of a quality suitable for the requirements of the Project. The DEVELOPER shall cause completion of the construction of the Project on the Property in full conformance with applicable local, State, and federal laws, statutes, regulations, and building and safety codes. 7.17 Relocation. If and to the extent that the construction of the proposed Project results in the permanent or temporary displacement of residential tenants, the DEVELOPER shall comply with all applicable local, State, and federal statutes and regulations with respect to relocation planning, advisory assistance and payment of monetary benefits. The DEVELOPER shall be solely responsible for payment of any relocation benefits to any displaced persons and any other obligations associated with complying with said relocation laws. Page 20 of 37 7.18 Reporting Requirements. The DEVELOPER shall submit to the CITY the following Project reports: A. From the date of execution of this Agreement, until issuance of the final Certificate of Completion, the DEVELOPER shall submit a Quarterly Report, in a form approved by the CITY, which will include, at a minimum, the following information: progress of the Project and affirmative marketing efforts. The Quarterly Reports are due 15 days after each March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st, during said period. B. Annually, beginning on the first day of the month following the CITY’s issuance of the Certificate of Completion, and continuing until the termination of the Agreement, the DEVELOPER shall submit an Annual Occupancy Report to the CITY, in a form approved by the CITY. The Annual Report shall include, at a minimum, the following information: occupancy of each Project Unit including the annual income and the household size, the date occupancy commenced, certification from an officer of the DEVELOPER that the Project is in compliance with the Affordability requirements, and such other information the CITY may be required by law to obtain. The DEVELOPER shall provide any additional information reasonably requested by the CITY upon request and at the annual monitoring of the Property. C. Annually, beginning on the first day of the month following the CITY’s issuance of the final Certificate of Completion, evidencing the construction of the Project, and continuing until the expiration of the Agreement, the DEVELOPER shall submit proof of property and liability insurance, as required in Article 9, listing the CITY as loss payee. 7.19 Scheduling and Extension of Time; Unavoidable Delay in Performance. It shall be the responsibility of the DEVELOPER to coordinate and schedule the work to be performed so that the Commencement of the Construction and issuance of the Notice of Completion will take place in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement and Project Schedule. The time for performance contained in the Project Schedule shall be automatically extended upon the following: A. The time for performance of provisions of the Agreement by either party shall be extended for a period equal to the period of any delay directly affecting the Project or this Agreement which is caused by: war, insurrection, strike or other labor disputes, lock-outs, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, acts of a public enemy, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, freight embargoes, lack of transportation, suits filed by third parties concerning or arising out of this Agreement, or unseasonable weather conditions (force majeure). An extension of time for any of the above specified causes will be granted only if written notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other party within ten calendar days from the date the affected party learns of the commencement of the cause and the resulting delay and such extension of time is accepted by the other party in writing. In any event, the Project must be completed no later than 180 calendar days after the scheduled completion date specified in this Agreement, notwithstanding any delay caused by that included in this Section. B. Any and all extensions hereunder shall be by mutual written agreement of the CITY Housing and Community Development Division Manager and the DEVELOPER, which shall not cumulatively exceed 180 days. Page 21 of 37 7.20 Certificate of Completion. Upon completion of the construction of the Project, the DEVELOPER shall submit to the CITY: 1) certification in writing that the Project has been substantially constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications, approved by the CITY; 2) a recorded Notice of Completion; 3) a cost-certifying final budget where the DEVELOPER shall identify the actual costs, in line-item format consistent with the Project Budget, of construction of the Project; and 4) a request for a recorded Certification of Completion. Upon a determination by the CITY that the DEVELOPER is in compliance with all of the DEVELOPER’s construction obligations, as specified in this Agreement, the CITY shall furnish, within 30 calendar days of a written request by the DEVELOPER, a recordable Certificate of Completion for the Project in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT “E”. The CITY will not unreasonably withhold or delay furnishing the Certificate of Completion. If the CITY fails to provide the Certificate of Completion within the specified time, it shall provide the DEVELOPER a written statement indicating in what respects the DEVELOPER has failed to complete the Project in conformance with this Agreement or has otherwise failed to comply with the terms of this Agreement, and what measures the DEVELOPER will need to take or what standards it will need to meet in order to obtain the Certificate of Completion. Upon the DEVELOPER taking the specified measures and meeting the specified standards, the DEVELOPER will certify to the CITY in writing of such compliance and the CITY shall deliver the recordable Certificate of Completion to the DEVELOPER in accordance with the provisions of this Section. ARTICLE 8. OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT 8.1 Operation of the Project. The DEVELOPER shall sell the Project Unit in full conformity with the terms of this HOME CHDO Agreement. 8.2 HOME Occupancy Requirements. One Project Unit shall be marketed and sold as a principal residence and be owner-occupied by a Low- to Moderate-Income Household. The DEVELOPER shall comply with the income targeting and Affordable Housing requirements of 24 C.F.R. 92.217 and 92.254. The homebuyer shall not take occupancy of the house prior to the close of escrow vesting title in said homebuyer. If escrow is extended beyond 30 days, the DEVELOPER shall enter into a lease to purchase option with the homebuyer. 8.3 Homebuyer Packet. Upon selection of the homebuyer, the DEVELOPER shall submit the homebuyer’s financial information and documentation to the CITY for review and approval. These documents include, but are not limited to the following: • Credit reports and checks; • Criminal background checks; • Employment/Income verification; • Occupancy restrictions; • Income Limit; • Restrictions on use of the premises; • Homebuyer Education Certification; and • Purchase and Sale Agreement The City shall approve all homebuyers prior to close of escrow. 8.4 Nondiscrimination. One HOME CHDO-Assisted Unit shall be available for occupancy on a continuous basis to a household who is income eligible. The DEVELOPER shall not illegally discriminate or segregate in the use, enjoyment, occupancy or conveyance Page 22 of 37 of any part of the Project or Property on the basis of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, family status, source of income/rental assistance subsidy, physical or mental disability, Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or AIDS-related conditions (ARC), sexual orientation, or any other arbitrary basis. The DEVELOPER shall otherwise comply with all applicable local, State and federal laws concerning nondiscrimination in housing. Neither the DEVELOPER nor any person claiming under or through the DEVELOPER, shall establish or permit any such practice or practices of illegal discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants or vendees of any HOME CHDO-Assisted Unit or in connection with employment of persons for the construction of any Project Unit. All deeds or contracts made or entered into by the DEVELOPER as to the Project Units or portion thereof, shall contain covenants concerning nondiscrimination consistent with this section. The DEVELOPER shall include a statement in all advertisements, notices, and signs for availability of Units for sale to the effect that the DEVELOPER is an Equal Housing Opportunity Provider. 8.5 Project House Sale Price. The initial sale price of each house is the total amount paid by the homebuyer for the house conveyance, inclusive of any first lien/loan and exclusive escrow fees, title insurance costs, broker’s commission (if any), loan fees or any other closing or transaction costs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sale price for the area as applied under 24 C.F.R. 92.254. ARTICLE 9. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY AND BONDS Without waiver of limitation, the parties agree as follows regarding the DEVELOPER’S Insurance and Indemnity Obligations: 9.1 Insurance Requirements. Throughout the life of this Agreement, the DEVELOPER shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all policies of insurance hereunder with an insurance company(ies) either (i) admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and rated not less than "A-VII" in Best's Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) authorized by the CITY's Risk Manager. The following policies of insurance are required: Best's Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) authorized by the CITY's Risk Manager. The following policies of insurance are required: (i) COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form CG 00 01 and include insurance for “bodily injury,” “property damage” and “personal and advertising injury” with coverage for premises and operations (including the use of owned and non-owned equipment), products and completed operations, and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the Agreement) with limits of liability of not less than the following: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage $2,000,000 per occurrence for personal and advertising injury $4,000,000 aggregate for products and completed operations $4,000,000 general aggregate applying separately to work performed under the Agreement (ii) COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Service Office (ISO) Business Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01, and include coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned Page 23 of 37 automobiles or other licensed vehicles (Code 1-Any Auto) with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (iii) WORKERS’ COMPENSATION insurance as required under the California Labor Code. (iv) EMPLOYEE LIABILITY insurance with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 each accident, $1,000,000 disease policy limit and $1,000,000 diseased each employee. (v) BUILDERS RISK (Course of Construction) insurance, obtained by the DEVELOPER or subcontractor in an amount equal to the completion value of the Project with no coinsurance penalty provisions. (Only required if the project includes new construction of a building; or renovation of, or addition to, an existing building.) (vi) CONTRACTOR POLLUTION LIABILITY (Unless waived in writing by the CITY’s Risk Manager or his/her designee, Pollution Liability is required, by the DEVELOPER or the Contractor for all environmental and water remediation work and for all work transporting fuel. Pollution insurance shall provide coverage for bodily injury, property damage or pollution clean-up costs that could result from of pollution condition, both sudden and gradual. Including a discharge of pollutants brought to the work site, a release of pre-existing pollutants at the site, or other pollution conditions with limits of liability of not less than the following: $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim $2,000,000 general aggregate per annual policy period In the event the DEVELOPER purchases an Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) to meet the minimum limits of insurance set forth above, this insurance policy(ies) shall “follow form” and afford no less coverage than the primary insurance policy(ies). In addition, such Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. In the event the DEVELOPER involves any lead-based, mold or asbestos environmental hazard, either the Automobile Liability insurance policy or the Pollution Liability insurance policy shall be endorsed to include Transportation Pollution Liability insurance covering materials to be transported by the DEVELOPER pursuant to the HOME CHDO Agreement. In the event the DEVELOPER involves any lead-based environmental hazard (e.g., lead- based paint), the DEVELOPER’s Pollution Liability insurance policy shall be endorsed to include coverage for lead based environmental hazards. In the event the DEVELOPER involves any asbestos environmental hazard (e.g., asbestos remediation), the DEVELOPER’s Pollution Liability insurance policy shall be endorsed to include coverage for asbestos environmental hazards. In the event the HOME CHDO Agreement involves any mold environmental hazard (e.g., mold remediation), the Pollution Liability insurance policy shall be endorsed to include coverage for mold environmental hazards and “microbial matter including mold” within the definition of “Pollution” under the policy. The DEVELOPER shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policies required hereunder and the DEVELOPER shall also be responsible for payment of any self-insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to, and approved by, the CITY’s Risk Manager or his/her designee. At the option of the CITY’s Risk Manager or his/her designee, either (i) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate Page 24 of 37 such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (ii) the DEVELOPER shall provide a financial guarantee, satisfactory to the CITY’s Risk Manager or his/her designee, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. At no time shall the CITY be responsible for the payment of any deductibles or self-insured retentions. All policies of insurance required hereunder shall be endorsed to provide that the coverage shall not be cancelled, non-renewed, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) calendar day written notice has been given to the CITY. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage or in limits, the DEVELOPER shall furnish the CITY with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy not less than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy. The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall be written on an occurrence form. The Pollution Liability insurance policy shall be written on either an occurrence form, or a claims-made form. The General Liability, Automobile Liability and Pollution Liability insurance policies shall name the CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers as an additional insured. All such policies of insurance shall be endorsed so the DEVELOPER’s insurance shall be primary and no contribution shall be required of the CITY. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. If the DEVELOPER maintains higher limits of liability than the minimums shown above, the CITY requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits of liability maintained by the DEVELOPER. The General Liability insurance policy shall also name the CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers as additional insureds for all ongoing and completed operations. The Builders Risk (Course of Construction) insurance policy shall be endorsed to name the CITY as loss payee. All insurance policies required including the Workers’ Compensation insurance policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation as to the City, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. The DEVELOPER shall furnish the CITY with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required hereunder. All certificates and applicable endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY’s Risk Manager or his/her designee before work commences. Upon request of the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall immediately furnish the CITY with a complete copy of any insurance policy required under this Agreement, including all endorsements, with said copy certified by the underwriter to be a true and correct copy of the original policy. This requirement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. Claims-Made Policies - If any coverage required is written on a claims-made coverage form: (i) The retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the effective date of the commencement of work by the DEVELOPER. (ii) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the work or termination of the Agreement, whichever first occurs. (iii) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the effective date of the Page 25 of 37 Agreement, or work commencement date, the DEVELOPER must purchase extended reporting period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the work or termination of the HOME CHDO Agreement, whichever first occurs. (iv) A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the CITY for review. (v) These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement. If at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension, the DEVELOPER, its contractor, or any of its subcontractors fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to the DEVELOPER shall be withheld until notice is received by the CITY that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to the CITY. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for the CITY to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by CITY hereunder shall in any way relieve the DEVELOPER of its responsibilities under this Agreement. The phrase “fail to maintain any required insurance” shall include, without limitation, notification received by the CITY that an insurer has commenced proceedings, or has had proceedings commenced against it, indicating that the insurer is insolvent. The fact that insurance is obtained by the DEVELOPER shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of the DEVELOPER, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify the CITY shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the DEVELOPER. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of the DEVELOPER, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under the supervision of the DEVELOPER, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-consultants, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. In the event of a partial or total destruction by the perils insured against of any or all of the work and/or materials herein provided for at any time prior to the final completion of the Agreement and the final acceptance by the CITY of the work or materials to be performed or supplied thereunder, the DEVELOPER shall promptly reconstruct, repair, replace, or restore all work or materials so destroyed or injured at his/her sole cost and expense. Nothing herein provided for shall in any way excuse the DEVELOPER or his/her insurance company from the obligation of furnishing all the required materials and completing the work in full compliance with the terms of this Agreement. SUBCONTRACTORS - If DEVELOPER subcontracts any or all of the services to be performed under this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall require, at the discretion of the CITY Risk Manager or designee, subcontractor(s) to enter into a separate Side Agreement with the City to provide required indemnification and insurance protection. Any required Side Agreement(s) and associated insurance documents for the subcontractor must be reviewed and preapproved by CITY Risk Manager or designee. If no Side Agreement is required, CONTRACTOR will be solely responsible for ensuring that its subcontractors maintain insurance coverage at levels no less than those required by applicable law and is customary in the relevant industry. Page 26 of 37 A. The above-described policies of insurance shall be endorsed to provide an unrestricted thirty (30) day written notice in favor of the CITY, of policy cancellation, change or reduction of coverage. In the event any policy is due to expire during the term of this Agreement, a new certificate evidencing renewal of such policy shall be provided not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy(ies). Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, change or reduction in coverage, the DEVELOPER or its contractors, as the case may be, shall file with the CITY a certified copy of the new or renewal policy and certificates for such policy. B. The DEVELOPER shall furnish the CITY with the certificate(s) and applicable endorsements for ALL required insurance prior to the CITY’s execution of this Agreement. The DEVELOPER shall furnish the CITY with copies of the actual policies upon the request of the CITY at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension. At all times hereunder the DEVELOPER shall maintain the required insurance in full force and effect. 9.2 Indemnity. To the furthest extent allowed by law including California Civil Code section 2782, DEVELOPER shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by CITY, DEVELOPER or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees, litigation expenses and cost to enforce this agreement), arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of performance of this Contract. DEVELOPER 'S obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether CITY or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers are passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages caused by the active or sole negligence, or the willful misconduct, of CITY or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. If DEVELOPER should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, DEVELOPER shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. 9.3 Property Insurance. The DEVELOPER shall maintain in full force and effect, throughout the remaining life of this Agreement, a policy or policies of property insurance acceptable to the CITY, covering the Project premises, with limits reflective of the value of the Project premises upon issuance of the Certificate of Completion or substantial completion of the project referenced in this agreement, including fire and Extended Comprehensive Exposure (ECE) coverage in an amount, form, substance, and quality as acceptable to the CITY’s Risk Manager. The CITY shall be added by endorsement as a loss payee thereon. 9.4 Bond Obligations. The DEVELOPER or its General Contractor shall obtain, pay for and deliver good and sufficient payment and performance bonds along with a Primary Obligee, Co-Obligee, or Multiple Obligee Rider in a form acceptable to the CITY from a Page 27 of 37 corporate surety, admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and Treasury-listed, in a form satisfactory to the CITY and naming the CITY as Obligee. A. The “Faithful Performance Bond” shall be at least equal to 100% of the DEVELOPER’s estimated construction costs as reflected in the DEVELOPER’s pro forma budget, attached hereto as EXHIBIT “C”, to the guarantee faithful performance of the Project, within the time prescribed, in a manner satisfactory to the CITY, consistent with this Agreement, and that all material and workmanship will be free from original or developed defects. B. The “Payment Bond” shall be at least equal to 100% of construction costs approved by the CITY to satisfy claims of material supplies and of mechanics and laborers employed for this Project. The bond shall be maintained by the DEVELOPER in full force and effect until the Project is completed and until all claims for materials and labor are paid and as required by the applicable provisions of Chapter 7, Title 15, Part 4, Division 3 of the California Civil Code. C. The “Material and Labor Bond” shall be at least equal to 100% of the DEVELOPER’s estimated construction costs as reflected in the DEVELOPER’s pro forma budget, attached hereto as EXHIBIT “C”, to satisfy claims of material supplies and of mechanics and laborers employed for this Project. The bond shall be maintained by the DEVELOPER in full force and effect until the Project is completed, and until all claims for materials and labor are paid, released, or time barred, and shall otherwise comply with any applicable provision of the California Code. ARTICLE 10. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES 10.1 Events of Default. The parties agree that each of the following shall constitute an "Event of Default" by the DEVELOPER for purposes of this Agreement after the cure period in Section 10.2 has expired without a cure: A. The DEVELOPER’s use of HOME CHDO Funds for costs other than Eligible Construction Costs or for uses not permitted by the terms of this Agreement; except that there shall be no Event of Default if the DEVELOPER’s use of the HOME CHDO Funds were for costs that were Eligible Costs at the time they were incurred but subsequently lose eligibility; B. The DEVELOPER’s failure to obtain and maintain the insurance coverage required under this HOME CHDO Agreement; C. Except as otherwise provided in this HOME CHDO Agreement, the failure of the DEVELOPER to punctually and properly perform any other covenant or agreement contained in this HOME CHDO Agreement including without limitation the following: (1) the DEVELOPER’s material deviation in the Project work specified in the Project Description as identified in this HOME CHDO Agreement, without the CITY’s prior written consent; (2) the DEVELOPER’s use of defective or unauthorized materials or defective workmanship in pursuit of the Project; (3) the DEVELOPER’s failure to commence or complete the Project, as specified in this HOME CHDO Agreement, unless delay is permitted under Section 7.19 of this Agreement; (4) cessation of the Project for a period of more than fifteen (15) consecutive days (other than as provided at Section 7.19 of this HOME CHDO Agreement) prior to submitting to the CITY certification that the Project is complete; (5) any material adverse change Page 28 of 37 in the condition of the DEVELOPER or its development team, or the Project that gives the CITY reasonable cause to believe that the Project cannot be completed by the scheduled completion date according to the terms of this HOME CHDO Agreement; (6) the DEVELOPER’s failure to remedy any deficiencies in record keeping or failure to provide records to the CITY upon the CITY’s request; or (7) the DEVELOPER’s failure to comply with any federal, State or local laws or applicable CITY restrictions governing the Project, including but not limited to provisions of this HOME CHDO Agreement pertaining to equal employment opportunity, nondiscrimination and lead- based paint; D. Any representation, warranty, or certificate given or furnished by or on behalf of the DEVELOPER shall prove to be materially false as of the date of which the representation, warranty, or certification was given, or that the DEVELOPER concealed or failed to disclose a material fact to the CITY, provided, however, that if any representation, warranty, or certification that proves to be materially false is due merely to the DEVELOPER’s inadvertence, the DEVELOPER shall have a 30-day opportunity after written notice thereof to cause such representation, warranty, or certification to be true and complete in every respect; E. The DEVELOPER shall file, or have filed against it, a petition of bankruptcy, insolvency, or similar law, State or federal, or shall file any petition or answer seeking, consenting to, or acquiescing in any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief, and such petition shall not have been vacated within 90 days; or shall be adjudicated bankrupt or insolvent, under any present or future statute, law, regulation, under State or federal law, and such judgment or decree is not vacated or set aside within 90 days; F. The DEVELOPER’s failure, inability or admission in writing of its inability to pay its debts as they become due or the DEVELOPER assignment for the benefit of creditors; G. A receiver, trustee, or liquidator shall be appointed for the DEVELOPER or any substantial part of the DEVELOPER’s assets or properties, and not be removed within 10 days; H. The DEVELOPER’s breach of any other material condition, covenant, warranty, promise or representation contained in this HOME CHDO Agreement not otherwise identified within this Section. I. Any substantial or continuous breach by the DEVELOPER of any material obligation owned by the DEVELOPER imposed by any other agreement with respect to the financing, of the Project, whether or not the CITY is a party to such agreement after expiration of all notice and cure periods contained within such document. 10.2 Notice of Default and Opportunity to Cure. The CITY shall give written notice to the DEVELOPER of any Event of Default by specifying: (1) the nature of the event or deficiency giving rise to the default; (2) the action required to cure the deficiency, if any action to cure is possible, and (3) a date, which shall not be less than the lesser of any time period provided in this HOME CHDO Agreement, any time period provided for in the notice no less than ten days, or 30 calendar days from the date of the notice, by which such deficiency must be cured, provided that if the specified deficiency or default cannot reasonably be cured within the specified time, with the CITY’s written consent, the DEVELOPER shall have an Page 29 of 37 additional reasonable period to cure so long as it commences cure within the specified time and thereafter diligently pursues the cure in good faith. The CITY acknowledges and agrees that the DEVELOPER shall have the right to cure any defaults hereunder and that notice and cure rights hereunder shall extend to any and all partners of the DEVELOPER that are previously identified in writing delivered to the CITY in the manner provided in this HOME CHDO Agreement. 10.3 Remedies Upon an Event of Default. Upon the happening of an Event of Default and a failure to cure said Event of Default within the time specified, the CITY’s obligation to disburse HOME CHDO Funds shall terminate. The CITY may also at its option and without notice institute any action, suit, or other proceeding in law, in equity or otherwise, which it shall deem necessary or proper for the protection of its interests and may without limitation proceed with any or all of the following remedies in any order or combination that the CITY may choose in its sole discretion: A. Terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice; B. Bring an action in equitable relief: (1) seeking specific performance of the terms and conditions of this HOME CHDO Agreement, and/or (2) enjoining, abating or preventing any violation of said terms and conditions, and/or (3) seeking declaratory relief; C. Pursue any other remedy allowed by law or in equity or under this Agreement; and ARTICLE 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS Without waiver of limitation, the DEVELOPER and the CITY agree that the following general provisions shall apply in the performance hereof: 11.1 Amendments. No modification or amendment of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless made in writing and signed by the DEVELOPER and the CITY hereto. The CITY recognizes that senior lenders and equity investors may request revisions to the Loan Documents to be consistent with their funding and investing requirements. Therefore, the CITY agrees to consider and negotiate as to any reasonable non-material changes to this HOME CHDO Agreement to address such requests, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney’s Office. 11.2 Attorney's Fees. If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses. 11.3 Binding on All Successors and Assigns. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this HOME CHDO Agreement, all the terms and provisions of this HOME CHDO Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, and their respective heirs, successors, assigns, and legal representatives. 11.4 Counterparts. This HOME CHDO Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which when executed and delivered will be deemed an original, and all of which together will constitute one instrument. The execution of this Agreement by any party hereto will not become effective until counterparts hereof have been executed by all parties hereto. 11.5 Disclaimer of Relationship. Nothing contained in this HOME CHDO Agreement, nor any act of the CITY or of the DEVELOPER, or of any other person, shall in Page 30 of 37 and by itself be deemed or construed by any person to create any relationship of third-party beneficiary, or of principal and agent, of limited or general partnership, or of joint venture. 11.6 Discretionary Governmental Actions. Certain planning, land use, zoning and other permits and public actions required in connection with the Project including, without limitation, the approval of this HOME CHDO Agreement, the environmental review and analysis under NEPA or any other statute, and other transactions contemplated by this HOME CHDO Agreement are discretionary government actions. Nothing in this HOME CHDO Agreement obligates the CITY or any other governmental entity to grant final approval of any matter described herein. Such actions are legislative, quasi-judicial, or otherwise discretionary in nature. The CITY cannot take action with respect to such matters before completing the environmental assessment of the Project under NEPA and any other applicable statutes. The CITY cannot and does not commit in advance that it will give final approval to any matter. The CITY shall not be liable, in contract, law or equity, to the DEVELOPER or any of its executors, administrators, transferees, successors-in-interest or assigns for any failure of any governmental entity to grant approval on any matter subject to discretionary approval. 11.7 Effective Date. This HOME CHDO Agreement shall be effective upon the date first above written, upon the CITY and the DEVELOPER’s complete execution following City Council approval and recordation of related documents. 11.8 Entire Agreement. This HOME CHDO Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This HOME CHDO Agreement supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. 11.9 Exhibits. Each exhibit and attachment referenced in this HOME CHDO Agreement is, by the reference, incorporated into and made a part of this HOME CHDO Agreement. 11.10 Expenses Incurred Upon Event of Default. The DEVELOPER shall reimburse the CITY for all reasonable expenses and costs of collection and enforcement, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the CITY as a result of one or more Events of Default by the DEVELOPER under this HOME CHDO Agreement. 11.11 Governing Law and Venue. Except to the extent preempted by applicable federal law, the laws of the State of California shall govern all aspects of this HOME CHDO Agreement, including execution, interpretation, performance, and enforcement. Venue for filing any action to enforce or interpret this HOME CHDO Agreement will be Fresno, California. 11.12 Headings. The headings of the articles, sections, and paragraphs used in this HOME CHDO Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be read or construed to affect the meaning or construction of any provision. 11.13 Interpretation. This HOME CHDO Agreement in its fully executed form is the result of the combined efforts of the DEVELOPER and the CITY. Any ambiguity will not be construed in favor or against either party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning. 11.14 Assignment or Succession. The DEVELOPER shall not sell, transfer, assign or otherwise dispose of all or a material part of any interest it might hold in the Property without the prior written consent of the CITY, which consent shall not be unreasonably Page 31 of 37 withheld or delayed. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon prior written notice to the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall be permitted to assign its rights and obligation under this HOME CHDO Agreement with respect to the Project without the CITY’s consent. 11.15 Third-Party Beneficiary. No contractor, subcontractor, mechanic, materialman, laborer, vendor, or other person hired or retained by the DEVELOPER shall be, nor shall any of them be deemed to be, third-party beneficiaries of this HOME CHDO Agreement, but each such person shall be deemed to have agreed: (a) that they shall look to the DEVELOPER as their sole source of recovery if not paid, and (b) except as otherwise agreed to by the CITY and any such person in writing, they may not enter any claim or bring any such action against the CITY under any circumstances. Except as provided by law, or as otherwise agreed to in writing between the CITY and such person, each such person shall be deemed to have waived in writing all right to seek redress from the CITY under any circumstances whatsoever. 11.16 No Waiver. Neither failure nor delay on the part of the CITY in exercising any right under this HOME CHDO Agreement shall operate as a waiver of such right, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any such right preclude any further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right. No waiver of any provision of this HOME CHDO Agreement or consent to any departure by the DEVELOPER therefrom shall be effective unless the same shall be in writing, signed on behalf of the CITY by a duly authorized officer thereof, and the same shall be effective only in the specific instance for which it is given. No notice to or demand on the DEVELOPER in any case shall entitle the DEVELOPER to any other or further notices or demands in similar or other circumstances or constitute a waiver of any of the CITY's right to take other or further action in any circumstances without notice or demand. 11.17 Nonreliance. The DEVELOPER hereby acknowledges having obtained such independent legal or other advice as it has deemed necessary and declares that in no manner has it relied on the CITY, its agents, employees, or attorneys in entering into this Agreement. 11.18 Notice. Any notice to be given to either party under the terms of this Agreement shall be given by certified United States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, at the addresses specified below, or at such other addresses as may be specified in writing by the parties. If to the CITY: City of Fresno Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721-3605 If to DEVELOPER: Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc. Attention: Executive Director 4991 E. McKinley Avenue, Suite 123 Fresno, CA 93727 11.19 Precedence of Documents. In the event of any conflict between the body of this HOME CHDO Agreement and any exhibit or attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this HOME CHDO Agreement will control. Page 32 of 37 11.20 Recording of Documents. The DEVELOPER agrees to cooperate with the CITY and execute any documents required, promptly upon the CITY’s request, and to promptly effectuate the recordation of this HOME CHDO Agreement, the Declaration of Restrictions, the Deed of Trust, and any other documents/instruments that the CITY requires to be recorded, in the Official Records of Fresno County, California, consistent with this Agreement. 11.21 Remedies Cumulative. All powers and remedies given by this HOME CHDO Agreement shall be cumulative and in addition to those otherwise provided by law. 11.22 Severability. The invalidity, illegality, or un-enforceability of any one or more of the provisions of this Agreement shall not affect the validity, legality, or enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof or thereof. // EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT “B” PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SCHEDULE I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project consists of the construction of one single-family wood framed, detached house to be located at 64 Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706, and related on-site and offsite improvements. The house will be sold as affordable housing and will be occupied by a Low- to Moderate-Income household. The DEVELOPER will construct one (3bed/2bath) 1,200 square foot house at the subject site. The eligible homebuyer will have an annual income of not more than 80% of area median income and will invest 500 hours of sweat-equity hours toward construction of their house. Once the house is constructed, it will be sold through escrow to Low- to Moderate-Income homebuyer. The homebuyer may receive all or a portion of the Loan Amount as mortgage assistance. If only a portion is used for mortgage assistance, Habitat for Humanity will be responsible for the loan balance. II. PROJECT SCHEDULE A. Commencement of Construction: January 31, 2024 B. Completion of Construction: September 15, 2024 C. Sale of the House to the Homebuyer: October 1, 2024 EXHIBIT “C” PROJECT BUDGET EXHIBIT “D” EXEMPLAR DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS Recorded at the Request of and When Recorded Return to: City of Fresno Planning and Development Dept. Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721-3605 (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY) The document is exempt from the payment of a recording fee in accordance with Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383. APN: 477-123-06 DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS THIS DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS (Declaration) is executed as of this _____ day of ______, 2023, by the Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., a (DECLARANT), in favor of the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (CITY). WHEREAS, the DECLARANT is the owner of the real estate in the City of Fresno, County of Fresno, California, 64 Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706 (APN: 477-123-06), which is more particularly described in EXHIBIT “A” – Property Description, attached hereto and made a part hereof, including the improvements thereon (Property); and WHEREAS, pursuant to a certain City of Fresno HOME CHDO Investment Partnerships Agreement dated _______, 2023, incorporated herein by reference (HOME CHDO Agreement) and instruments referenced therein, the DECLARANT agrees to utilize, and the CITY agrees to provide, certain HOME CHDO funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), to the DECLARANT and the DECLARANT agrees to construct and preserve one unit as an Affordable Low- to Moderate- Income unit reserved for a household earning up to 80% of the area median income for the Fresno Metropolitan Statistical Area (FMSA). The one house shall be a 3bed/2bath unit, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the HOME CHDO Agreement; and WHEREAS, the HOME CHDO regulations promulgated by HUD, including without limitation 24 C.F.R. 92.252 and the HOME CHDO Agreement impose certain affordability requirements upon property owned by the DECLARANT, which affordability restrictions shall be enforceable for a 30-year period; and WHEREAS, these restrictions are intended to bind the DECLARANT, and all purchasers of the Property and their successors. NOW THEREFORE, the DECLARANT declares that the Property is held and will be held, transferred, encumbered, used, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the covenants, restrictions, and limitations set forth in this Declaration, all of which are declared and agreed to be in furtherance of the Project. All of the restrictions, covenants and limitations will run with the land and will be binding on all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property or any part thereof, will inure to the benefit of the CITY, and will be enforceable by it. Any purchaser under a contract of sale covering any right, title or interest in any part of the Property, by accepting a deed or a contract of sale or agreement of purchase, accepts the document subject to, and agrees to be bound by, any and all restrictions, covenant, and limitations set forth in this Declaration commencing on the date the DECLARANT is notified by the CITY that the HOME CHDO-Assisted Unit Household information has been entered into HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) as provided in the HOME CHDO Agreement, constituting the commencement of the 30-year Affordability Period. 1. Declarations. The DECLARANT hereby declares that the Property is and shall be subject to the covenants and restrictions hereinafter set forth, all of which are declared to be in furtherance of the Project and the HOME CHDO Agreement and are established and agreed upon for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value of the Property and in consideration of the CITY entering into the HOME CHDO Agreement with the DECLARANT. 2. Restrictions. The following covenants and restrictions on the use and enjoyment of the Property shall be in addition to any other covenants and restrictions affecting the Property, and all such covenants and restrictions are for the benefit and protection of the CITY and shall run with the Property and be binding on any future owners of the Property and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by CITY. These covenants and restrictions are as follows: a. The DECLARANT for itself and its successor(s) on title covenants and agrees that from the date the Project is entered into IDIS as complete, until the expiration of the Affordability Period, it shall cause one HOME CHDO-Assisted housing units to be used as a single-family owner-occupied affordable housing for a Low- to Moderate-Income Household with an income up to 80% of area median income. Unless otherwise provided in the HOME CHDO Agreement, the term HOME CHDO-Assisted housing shall include, without limitation, compliance with the following requirements: i. Nondiscrimination. There shall be no discrimination against nor segregation of any persons or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or handicap in the sale, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of any of the Property, nor shall the DECLARANT establish or permit any practice of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of owners or vendees of the Project and/or Property. ii. Principal Residence. The Affordable Housing Unit constituting the Project upon the Property shall be sold only to eligible natural persons, who shall occupy the house as the purchaser’s principal place of residence. The forgoing requirement that the purchaser of the house constituting the Project Property occupy the house as the purchaser’s principal residence does not apply to persons, other than natural persons, who acquire the Project Property or portion thereof by foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure; or HUD qualified entities that acquire the Property or portion thereof with the consent of the CITY. iii. Household Income Requirements. The Affordable Housing Unit constituting the Project upon the Property may be conveyed only to a natural person(s) whose annual Household income at the time of purchase is not greater than 80% of the most recent annual median income calculated and published by HUD for the Fresno Metropolitan Statistical Area applicable to such household’s size. iv. Recapture Provision. Should the Affordable Housing Unit upon the Property not continue to be the principal residence of the Household purchasing the Property/house as affordable housing for the duration of the period of affordability, then a portion of the HOME CHDO financial assistance provided by the CITY and allocated to the Property/house shall immediately come due and must be repaid to the CITY’s HOME Program Trust Fund and thereupon the balance of the affordability restrictions shall be released. Item (a) above is hereinafter referred to as the Covenant and Restriction. 3. Enforcement of Restrictions. Without waiver or limitation, the CITY shall be entitled to injunctive or other equitable relief against any violation or attempted violation of any Covenant and Restriction. 4. Acceptance and Ratification. All present and future owners of the Property and other persons claiming by, through, or under them shall be subject to and shall comply with the Covenant and Restriction. The acceptance of a deed of conveyance to the Property shall constitute an agreement that the Covenant and Restriction, as may be amended or supplemented from time to time, are accepted and ratified by future owners, tenant or occupant, and such Covenant and Restriction shall be a covenant running with the land and shall bind any person having at any time any interest or estate in the Property, all as though such Covenant and Restriction was recited and stipulated at length in each and every deed, conveyance, mortgage or lease thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon foreclosure by a lender or other transfer in lieu of foreclosure, or assignment of an FHA-insured mortgage to HUD, the Affordability Period shall be terminated unless the foreclosure or other transfer in lieu of foreclosure or assignment recognizes any contractual or legal rights of public agencies, nonprofit sponsors, or others to take actions that would avoid the termination of low-income affordability. However, the requirements with respect to a HOME CHDO-Assisted Unit shall be revived according to their original terms, if during the original Affordability Period, the owner of record before the foreclosure or other transfer, or any entity that includes the former owner of those with whom the former owner has or had formally, family or business ties, obtains an ownership interest in the Project or the Property, the Affordability Period shall be revived according to its original terms. 5. Benefit. This Declaration shall run with and bind the Property for a term commencing on the date Project information is entered into IDIS as complete, until the expiration of the 30-year Affordability Period. The failure or delay at any time of CITY and/or any other person entitled to enforce this Declaration shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the same, or of the right to enforce the same at any time or from time to time thereafter, or an estoppel against the enforcement thereof. 6. Costs and Attorney’s Fees. In any proceeding arising because of failure of the DECLARANT or any future owner of the Property to comply with the Covenant and Restriction required by this Declaration, as may be amended from time to time, the CITY shall be entitled to recover its respective costs and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in connection with such default or failure. 7. Waiver. Neither the DECLARANT nor any future owner of the Property may exempt itself from liability for failure to comply with the Covenant and Restriction required in this Declaration; provided however, that upon the transfer of the Property, the transferring owner may be released from liability hereunder, upon the CITY’s written consent of such transfer, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed. 8. Severability. The invalidity of the Covenant and Restriction or any other covenant, restriction, condition, limitation, or other provision of this Declaration shall not impair or affect in any manner the validity, enforceability, or effect of the rest of this Declaration and each shall be enforceable to the greatest extent permitted by law. 9. Pronouns. Any reference to the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender herein shall, unless the context clearly requires the contrary, be deemed to refer to and include all genders. Words in the singular shall include and refer to the plural, and vice versa, as appropriate. 10. Interpretation. The captions and titles of the various articles, sections, subsections, paragraphs, and subparagraphs of this Declaration are inserted herein for ease and convenience of reference only and shall not be used as an aid in interpreting or construing this Declaration or any provision hereof. 11. Amendments or Modifications. No Amendments or modifications shall be permitted without the prior written consent of the CITY and the DECLARANT. 12. Recordation. The DECLARANT acknowledges that this Declaration will be file of record in the County of Fresno Recorder’s Office, State of California. 13. Capitalized Terms. All capitalized terms used in this Declaration, unless otherwise defined herein, shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the HOME CHDO Agreement. 14. Headings. The headings of the articles, sections, and paragraphs used in this Declaration are for convenience only and shall not be read or construed to affect the meaning or construction of any provision. // IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DECLARANT has executed this Declaration of Restrictions on the date first written above. DECLARANT: HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FRESNO COUNTY, INC., a California corporation By: Name: Ashley Hedemann Title: Executive Director (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) Date: EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description To Declaration of Restrictions EXHIBIT “E” CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION Recorded at the Request of and When Recorded Return to: City of Fresno Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721-3605 (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY) This Certificate of Completion is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Fresno and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code Section 6103. APN: 477-123-06 City of Fresno By: Planning and Development Department Date: Certificate of Completion APN: 477-123-06 Recitals: A. By a HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Community Housing Development Organization Agreement dated ______, 2023, (HOME CHDO Agreement) between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation (CITY), Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., a California corporation (DEVELOPER), the DEVELOPER agreed to construct one for sale unit and related on-site and off-site improvements upon the Property described in EXHIBIT “A” attached to the HOME CHDO Agreement, and made part hereof by this reference (the Property), with assistance of HOME CHDO Funds while meeting the affordable housing, income targeting and other requirements of 24 C.F.R. 92 according to the terms and conditions of the HOME CHDO Agreement and Loan Documents and other documents/instruments referenced therein. B. The HOME CHDO Agreement was recorded on , as Instrument No. in the Official Records of Fresno County, California. C. Under the terms of the HOME CHDO Agreement, after the DEVELOPER completes the Project, the DEVELOPER may ask the CITY to record a Certificate of Completion. D. The DEVELOPER has asked the CITY to furnish the DEVELOPER with a recordable Certificate of Completion. E. The CITY’s issuance of this Certificate of Completion is conclusive evidence that the DEVELOPER has completed the Project as set forth in the HOME CHDO Agreement. NOW THEREFORE: 1. The CITY certifies that the DEVELOPER commenced construction of the Project on _______, 2023 and completed construction of the Project on _________ 202X and has done so in full compliance with the HOME CHDO Agreement. 2. This Certificate of Completion is not evidence of the DEVELOPER’s compliance with, or satisfaction of, any obligation to any mortgage or security interest holder, or any mortgage or security interest insurer, securing money lent to finance work on the Property or Project, or any part of the Property or Project. 3. This Certificate of Completion is not a notice of completion as referred to in California Civil Code Section 3093. 4. Nothing contained herein modifies any provision of the HOME CHDO Agreement. // IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY has executed this Certificate of Completion as of this ________day of , 2023. CITY OF FRESNO By: Date: Planning & Development Department (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: TODD STERMER, CMC ANDREW JANZ CITY CLERK City Attorney By: By: Name: Name: Tracy N. Parvanian Title: Deputy City Clerk Title: Supervising Deputy City Attorney Date: Date: HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FRESNO COUNTY, INC., a California corporation By: Date: Name: Ashley Hedemann Title: Executive Director (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) EXHIBIT “F” - PROMISSORY NOTE DO NOT DESTROY THIS NOTE: When paid, this note, must be surrendered to Borrower for Cancellation. _______________________________________________________________________________ PROMISSORY NOTE Secured by Deed of Trust Loan Amount: $253,673.00 Date: Fresno, California Promise to Pay. For value received, the undersigned, Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., a California Corporation (Borrower), promises to pay to the order of the City of Fresno, a California municipal corporation (Lender), the sum of Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy- Three dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) along with interest on the unpaid principal at the rate of 2% per annum, all due and payable on or before ______________ (the Borrower Loan Maturity Date) pursuant to the parties’ HOME CHDO Agreement dated ______, 2023, (HOME CHDO Agreement), on which date the unpaid principal balance together with interest and unpaid penalties or late changes where applicable thereon shall be due and payable, along with attorney’s fees and costs of collections, without relief from valuation and appraisement laws, provided that, in the event the Borrower is not then in default of the HOME CHDO Agreement, the Borrower may at any time prior to the Borrower Loan Maturity Date convey the completed single-family Affordable Unit securing the Note to a Low to Moderate-Income homebuyer through a purchase escrow (Escrow) that conforms to the HOME CHDO Agreement and concurrent therewith assigns all or a portion of the Note as mortgage assistance at 0% interest with a lump sum principal only payment due and payable from the homebuyer on, or before _____________, expiration of 30 years from close of escrow (Loan Maturity Date). Any failure to make a payment required hereunder shall constitute a default under this Note. Definitions. All capitalized terms used in this Note, unless otherwise defined, will have the respective meanings specified in the HOME CHDO Agreement. Business Day. Means any day other than Saturday, Sunday, or public holiday or the equivalent for banks generally under the laws of California. Whenever any payment to be made under this Note is stated to be due on a day other than a Business Day, that payment may be made on the next succeeding Business Day. However, if the extension would cause the payment to be made in a new calendar month, that payment will be made on the next preceding Business Day. Security. This Note, and any extensions or renewals hereof, is secured by a Deed of Trust, Security Agreement executed by the Borrower and recorded against the Property in Fresno County, California, as Document No._____________ on _____, 2023, that provides for acceleration upon stated events, and executed in favor of the Lender (Deed of Trust), creating and insured as a not worse than 2nd position lien on the Property, subordinated only to a lien created by Borrower to insure payment of monies borrowed to pay for the construction of the Affordable Housing Unit on the Property. Said Deed of Trust shall be subject to the terms of the Homebuyer Written Agreement attached hereto, and such shall automatically be incorporated in the terms of the Deed of Trust that secures this Note. Said Deed of Trust is insured by CLTA Lender’s policy in the principal amount of, and endorsed for, this Note. Time is of the Essence. It will be a default under this Note if the Borrower defaults under the HOME CHDO Agreement, defaults under any other Loan Documents, or if Borrower fails to pay when due any sum payable under this Note. In the event of a default by the Borrower, the Borrower shall pay a late charge equal to the lesser of 2% of any outstanding payment or the maximum amount allowed by law. All payments collected shall be applied first to payment of any costs, fees or other charges due under this Note or any other Loan Documents then to the interest and then to principal balance. On the occurrence of a default or on the occurrence of any other event that under the terms of the Loan Documents give rise to the right to accelerate the balance of the indebtedness, then, at the option of Lender, this Note or any notes or other instruments that may be taken in renewal or extension of all or any part of the indebtedness will immediately become due without any further presentment, demand, protest, or notice of any kind. Terms of Payment. The indebtedness evidenced by this Note may, at the option of the Borrower, be prepaid in whole or in part without penalty. The Lender will apply all the prepayments first to the payment of any costs, fees, late charges, or other charges due under this Note or under any of the other Loan Documents and then to the interest and then to the principal balance. All Loan payments are payable in lawful money of the United States of America, to: City of Fresno - Finance Accounts Receivable 2600 Fresno Street, Suite 2156 Fresno, CA 93721 The Borrower agrees to pay all costs including, without limitation, attorney fees, incurred by the holder of this Note in enforcing payment, whether or not suit is filed, and including, without limitation, all costs, attorney fees, and expenses incurred by the holder of this Note in connection with any bankruptcy, reorganization, arrangement, or other similar proceedings involving the undersigned that in any way affects the exercise by the holder of this Note of its rights and remedies under this Note. All costs incurred by the holder of this Note in any action undertaken to obtain relief from the stay of bankruptcy statutes are specifically included in those costs and expenses to be paid by the Borrower. The Borrower will pay to the Lender all attorney fees and other costs referred to in this paragraph on demand. Any notice, demand, or request relating to any matter set forth herein shall be in writing and shall be given as provided in the HOME CHDO Agreement. No delay or omission of the Lender in exercising any right or power arising in connection with any default will be construed as a waiver or as acquiescence, nor will any single or partial exercise preclude any further exercise. The Lender may waive any of the conditions in this Note and no waiver will be deemed to be a waiver of the Lender’s rights under this Note, but rather will be deemed to have been made in pursuance of this Note and not in modification. No waiver of any default will be construed to be a waiver of or acquiescence in or consent to any preceding or subsequent default. Terms of Security Instruments. The Deed of Trust securing this note provides as follows: DUE ON SALE–CONSENT BY BENEFICIARY. The Beneficiary may, at its option, declare immediately due and payable all sums secured by this Deed of Trust upon the sale or transfer of all or any portion of the Property, or any interest therein, other than a sale to a Low- to Moderate-Income homebuyer as provided in the HOME CHDO Agreement, without the Beneficiary’s prior consent. A “sale or transfer” means the conveyance of the Property or any right, title or interest therein; whether legal, beneficial or equitable; whether voluntary or involuntary; whether by outright sale, deed, installment sale contract, land contract, contract for deed, leasehold interest with a term greater than three (3) years, lease-option contract, or by sale, assignment, or transfer of any beneficial interest in or to any land trust holding title to the Property, or by any other method of conveyance of land interest. If any Trustor is a corporation, partnership or limited liability, company, transfer also includes any change in ownership of more than 25% of the voting stock, partnership interests or limited liability company interests, as the case may be, of Trustor. However, this option shall not be exercised by the Beneficiary if such exercise is prohibited by applicable law. Assignment by Lender. The Lender may transfer this Note and deliver to the transferee all or any part of the Property then held by it as security under this Note, and the transferee will then become vested with all the powers and rights given to Lender; and Lender will then be forever relieved from any liability or responsibility in the matter, but Lender will retain all rights and powers given by this Note with respect to Property not transferred. Enforceability. If any one or more of the provisions in this Note is held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions will not in any way be affected or impaired. This Note will be binding on and inure to the benefit of Borrower, Lender, and their respective successors and assigns. Governing Law. The Borrower agrees that this Note will be deemed to have been made under and will be governed by the laws of California in all respects, including matters of construction, validity, and performance, and that none of its terms or provisions may be waived, altered, modified, or amended except as the Lender may consent to in a writing duly signed by the Lender or its authorized agents. // IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the BORROWER has caused this Promissory Note to be executed as of the date and year first above written. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FRESNO COUNTY, INC., a California corporation By: Date: Name: Ashley Hedemann Title: Executive Director (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) EXHIBIT “G” EXEMPLAR DEED OF TRUST Recorded at the Request of and When Recorded Return to: City of Fresno Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721-3605 (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY) TITLE ORDER NO.___________________ ESCROW NO._________________________ A.P.N.: 477-123-06 DEED OF TRUST ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS THIS DEED OF TRUST (Deed of Trust) made this __ day of ______, 2023, by and between Habitat for Humanity Fresno County, Inc., a California corporation (Borrower), Fidelity National Title Company, a California Corporation (Trustee), and the City of Fresno, a Municipal Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California whose address is 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721 (Beneficiary and Lender). The Borrower, in consideration of the indebtedness herein recited and the trust herein created, does irrevocably grant and convey to Trustee, in trust, with power of sale, all the Borrower’s right, title, and interest now owned or hereafter acquired in the real property (Land) known as 64 Atchison Street, Fresno, CA 93706, located in Fresno County, California and more particularly described in the Attached EXHIBIT “A”, incorporated by reference to the Land later acquired during the term of this Deed of Trust will be subject to this Deed of Trust), together with the rents, issues, and profits, subject however, to the right, power, and authority granted and conferred on the Borrower in this Deed of Trust to collect and apply the rents, issues, and profits; and The Borrower also irrevocably grants, transfers, and assigns to the Trustee, in trust, with power of sale, all of the Borrower’s right, title and interest now owned or later acquired for and located at the property: (1) All buildings (Buildings) and improvements now or later on the land and all easements, rights, appurtenances, water and water rights, minerals and mineral rights; all machinery, equipment, appliances, and fixtures for the generation or distribution of air, water, heat, electricity, light, fuel, or refrigeration or for ventilating or sanitary purposes or for the exclusion of vermin or insects or for the removal of dust, refuse, or garbage; all wall safes, built-in furniture, and installations, window shades and blinds, light fixtures, fire hoses and brackets, screens, linoleum, carpets, furniture, furnishings, fixtures, plumbing, laundry tubs and trays, refrigerators, heating units, stoves, water heaters, incinerators, and communication systems and installations for which any Building is specially designed; all of these item, whether now or later installed, being declared to be for all purposes of this Deed of Trust a part of the Land, the specific enumerations in this Deed of Trust not excluding the general; and (2) The rents, issues, profits, and proceeds relating to the foregoing; and (3) The Property to the extent not included on clauses (1) and (2) above. TO SECURE, in order of priority that the Beneficiary determines: (1) Payment of the indebtedness evidenced by a note of the Borrower of even date with this Deed of Trust in the principal amount of Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Six Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars and 00/100 ($253,673.00) (Note), payable to the Beneficiary or order, and all extensions, modifications, or renewals of that Note; (2) Payment of the interest on that indebtedness according to the terms of the Note; (3) Payment of all other sums (with interest as provided herein) becoming due and payable to the Beneficiary or the Trustee pursuant to the terms of this Deed of Trust; (4) Performance of every obligation contained in this Deed of Trust, the Note, the HOME Investment Partnerships, Community Housing Development Organization Program Agreement dated the ___ of ____, 2023 (HOME CHDO Agreement), and its related documents, the Declaration of Restrictions dated the ___ of ______, 2023, any instrument now or later evidencing or securing any indebtedness secured by this Deed of Trust, and any agreements, supplemental agreements, or other instruments of security executed by Borrower as of the same date of this Deed of Trust for the purpose of further securing any indebtedness amending this Deed of Trust or any instrument secured by this Deed of Trust (collectively, the “Loan Documents”); and (5) Payment of all other obligations owed by Borrower to Beneficiary that by their terms recite that they are secured by this Deed of Trust, including those incurred as primary obligor or as guarantor. The Borrower covenants that the Borrower is lawfully seized of the estate hereby conveyed and has the right to grant and convey the Property, and that the Property is encumbered only for encumbrances of record. The Borrower covenants that the Borrower will forever warrant and will defend the grant made in this Deed of Trust against all claims and demands, subject to encumbrances of record. The Borrower covenants that the Borrower will maintain and preserve the lien of this Deed of Trust until all the indebtedness under the Note is paid in full. The Borrower represents and warrants to the Beneficiary that as of the date of this Deed of Trust, the Borrower is a validly existing and is in good standing under the laws of the State of California and is qualified to do business in the State of California; that the Borrower has the requisite power and authority to own, develop, and operate the property; and that the Borrower is in compliance with all laws, regulations, ordinances, and orders of public authorities applicable to it. The Borrower represents and warrants to the Beneficiary that as of the date of this Deed of Trust the execution, delivery, and performance by the Borrower and the borrowings evidenced by the Note are within the power of the Borrower; have been duly authorized by all requisite corporate or partnership actions, as appropriate; has received all necessary governmental approvals; and will not violate any provision of law, any order of any court or agency of government, the charter documents of the Borrower, or any indenture, agreement, or any other instrument to which the Borrower is a party or by which the Borrower or any of it property is bound, nor will they conflict with, result in a breach of, or constitute (with due notice and lapse of time) a default under any indenture, agreement, or other instrument, or result in the creation or imposition of any lien, charge, or encumbrance of any nature on any of the property or assets of the Borrower, except as contemplated by the provisions of the Loan Documents; and each of the Loan Documents, when executed and delivered to the Beneficiary, will constitute a valid obligation, enforceable in accordance with its terms. The Borrower represents and warrants to the Beneficiary that as of the date of this Deed of Trust that the Property is not used principally for agricultural or grazing purposes; that the Borrower is engaged in the development of lower-income housing and that the principal purpose of the HOME CHDO Program Loan is the construction of affordable housing and improvements to the Property. UNIFORM COVENANTS. The Borrower and the Lender covenant and agree as follows: 1. Payment of Principal. The Borrower shall promptly pay when due the principal indebtedness evidenced by the Note. 2. Hazard Insurance. The Borrower, at its sole cost and expense, for the mutual benefit of the Borrower and Beneficiary, shall keep the improvements now existing or hereafter erected on the Property insured against loss by fire, hazards included within the term "extended coverage", and such other hazards as the Lender may require and, in such amount, and for such period as the Lender may require as set forth in the HOME CHDO Agreement referenced above. The insurance carrier providing the insurance shall be chosen by the Borrower subject to approval by the Lender; provided that such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. All insurance policies and renewals thereof shall be in a form acceptable to the Lender and shall include a standard mortgage clause in favor of and in a form acceptable to the Lender. The Lender shall have the right to hold the policies and renewals thereof, subject to the terms of any mortgage, deed of trust or other security agreement with a lien which has priority over this Deed of Trust. In the event of loss, the Borrower shall give prompt notice to the insurance carrier and the Lender. The Lender may make proof of loss if not made promptly by the Borrower. If the Property is abandoned by the Borrower, or if the Borrower fails to respond to the Lender within 30 days from the date notice is mailed by the Lender to the Borrower that the insurance carrier offers to settle a claim for insurance benefits, the Lender is authorized to collect and apply the insurance proceeds at the Lender's option either to restoration or repair of the Property or to the sums secured by this Deed of Trust. 3. Preservation and Maintenance of Property. Leaseholds; Condominiums; Planned Unit Developments. The Borrower shall keep the Property in good repair and shall not commit waste or permit impairment or deterioration of the Property and shall comply with the provisions of any lease if this Deed of Trust is on a leasehold. If this Deed of Trust is on a unit in a condominium or a planned unit development, the Borrower shall perform all of the Borrower's obligations under the declaration or covenants creating or governing the condominium or planned unit development, the by-laws and regulations of the condominium or planned unit development, and constituent documents. The Borrower shall not permit overcrowded conditions to exist as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 4. Protection of Lender's Security. If the Borrower fails to perform the covenants and agreements contained in this Deed of Trust, or if any action or proceeding is commenced which materially affects the Lender's interest in the Property, then the Lender, at the Lender's option, upon notice to the Borrower, may make such appearances, disburse such sums, including reasonable attorney's fees, and take such action as is necessary to protect the Lender's interest. If the Lender requires mortgage insurance as a condition of making the loan secured by this Deed of Trust, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain such insurance in effect until such time as the requirement for such insurance terminates in accordance with the Borrower's and Lender's written agreement or applicable laws. Any amounts disbursed by the Lender pursuant to this Paragraph 4 shall become additional indebtedness of the Borrower secured by this Deed of Trust. Unless the Borrower and Lender agree to other terms of payment, such amounts shall be payable upon notice from the Lender to the Borrower requesting payment thereof. Nothing contained in this paragraph 4 shall require the Lender to incur any expense or take any action hereunder. 5. Inspection. The Lender may make or cause to be made reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Property, provided that the Lender shall provide the Borrower notice prior to any such inspection specifying reasonable cause therefore related to the Lender's interest in the Property. 6. Condemnation. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages, direct or consequential, in connection with any condemnation or other taking of the Property, or part thereof, or for conveyance in lieu of condemnation, are hereby assigned and shall be paid to the Lender, subject to the terms of any mortgage, deed of trust or other security agreement with a lien which has priority over this Deed of Trust. 7. Borrower Not Released; Forbearance By Lender Not a Waiver. The extension of the time for payment or modification of amortization of the sums secured by this Deed of Trust granted by the Lender to any successor in interest of the Borrower shall not operate to release, in any manner, the liability of the original Borrower and the Borrower's successors in interest. The Lender shall not be required to commence proceedings against such successor or refuse to extend time for payment or otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Deed of Trust be reason of any demand made by the original Borrower and the Borrower's successors in interest. Any forbearance by the Lender in exercising any right or remedy hereunder, or otherwise afforded by applicable law, shall not be waiver of or preclude the exercise of any such right of remedy. 8. Successors and Assignees Bound; Joint and Several Liability; Co-Signers. The covenants and agreements herein contained shall bind, and the rights hereunder shall inure to the respective successors and assignees of the Lender and the Borrower. All covenants and agreements of the Borrower shall be joint and several. Any borrower who co-signs this Deed of Trust, but does not execute the Note is: (a) co-signing this Deed of Trust only to grant and convey that the Borrower's interest in the Property of Trustee under the terms of this Deed of Trust, and (b) not personally liable on the Note or under this Deed of Trust or the Note, without that Borrower's consent and without releasing that Borrower or modifying this Deed of Trust as to that Borrower's interest in the Property. 9. Transferability. One of the inducements to the Beneficiary for making the Loan is the identity of the Borrower. The existence of any interest in the Property other than the interests of the Borrower and Beneficiary and any encumbrance permitted in this Deed of Trust, even though subordinate to the security interest of the Beneficiary, and the existence of any interest in the Borrower other than those of the present owners, would impair the Property and the security interest of the Beneficiary, and, therefore, except as provided herein or in the Loan Documents, the Borrower will not sell, convey, assign, transfer, alienate, or otherwise dispose of its interest in the Property, either voluntarily or by operation of law, or agree to do so, without the prior written consent of the Beneficiary. The consent to one transaction by the Beneficiary will not be deemed a waiver of the right to require consent to further or successive transactions. If the Borrower is a corporation, any sale, transfer, or disposition of 50% or more of the voting interest of the Borrower or of any entity that directly or indirectly owns or controls the Borrower, including, without limitation, the parent company of the Borrower, and the parent company of the parent company of the Borrower, will constitute a sale of the Property for purposes of this article. If the Borrower is a partnership any change or addition of a general partner of the Borrower, change of a partnership interest of the Borrower with the exception of a limited partner transfer, which shall not require the Beneficiary’s consent, or sale, transfer, or disposition of 50% or more of the voting interest or partnership interest of any general partner of the Borrower or of any corporation, partnership or entity that directly or indirectly owns or controls any general partner of the Borrower, including, without limitation, each parent company of a general partner of the Borrower and each parent company of any parent company of a general partner of the Borrower, will constitute a sale of the Property for purposes of this section. If the Borrower is a limited liability company, any change of the manager or any sale, transfer or disposition of 50% or more of the partnership interests of the Borrower, or disposition of 50% or more of the voting interest of the Borrower or of any corporation, partnership or entity that directly or indirectly owns or controls any member of the Borrower, including without limitations, each parent company of the Borrower and each parent company of any parent company of a member of the Borrower, will constitute a sale of the Property for purposes of this section. Any transaction in violation of this section will cause all Indebtedness, irrespective of the maturity dates, at the option of the Beneficiary and without demand or notice, immediately to become due, together with any prepayment premium in accordance with the terms of the Note except as prohibited by law. 10. Notice. Except for any notice required under applicable law to be given in another manner, (a) any notice to the Borrower provided for in this Deed of Trust shall be given by delivering it or by mailing such notice by certified mail addressed to the Borrower at the Property Address or at such other address as the Borrower may designate by notice to the Lender as provided herein, and (b) any notice to the Lender shall be given by certified mail to the Lender's address stated herein or to such other address as the Lender may designate by notice to the Borrower as provided herein. Any notice provided for in this Deed of Trust shall be deemed to have been given to the Borrower or Lender when given in the manner designated herein. 11. Governing Law; Severability. The State and local laws applicable to this Deed of Trust shall be the laws of the jurisdiction in which the Property is located. The foregoing sentence shall not limit the applicability of federal law to this Deed of Trust or if the Note conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other provisions of this Deed of Trust or the Note which can be given effect without the conflicting provision, and to this end the provisions of this Deed of Trust and the Note are declared to be severable. As used herein, "costs", "expenses", and "attorney's fees" include all sums to the extent not prohibited by applicable law or limited herein. 12. Borrower's Copy. The Borrower shall be furnished a copy of the Note and a conformed copy of the recorded Deed of Trust at the time of execution or after recordation thereof. NON-CONFORMING COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree as follows: 13. Acceleration; Remedies. Upon the Borrower's breach of any covenant or agreement of the Borrower in this Deed of Trust, including the covenants to pay when due any sums secured by this Deed of Trust, the Note or the HOME Program restrictions, the Lender, prior to acceleration shall give notice to the Borrower as provided in paragraph 10 hereof specifying: (1) the breach; (2) the action required to cure such breach; (3) a date, not less than ten days from the date notice is mailed to the Borrower, by which such breach must be cured or 30 days for a non- monetary default; and (4) that failure to cure such breach on or before the date specified in the notice may result in acceleration of the sums secured by this Deed of Trust and sale of the Property. The notice shall further inform the Borrower of the right to reinstate after acceleration and the right to bring a court action to assert the nonexistence of a default or any other defense of the Borrower to acceleration and sale. If the breach is not cured on or before the date specified in the notice, the Lender, at the Lender's option may declare all of the sums secured by this Deed of Trust to be immediately due and payable without further demand and may invoke the power of sale and any other remedies permitted by applicable law. The Lender shall be entitled to collect all reasonable costs and expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this paragraph 13, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees. If the Lender invokes the power of sale, the Lender shall execute or cause the Trustee to execute a written notice of the occurrence of an event of default and of the Lender's election to cause the Property to be sold and shall cause such notice to be recorded in each county in which the Property or some part thereof is located. The Lender or the Trustee shall mail copies of such notice in the manner prescribed by applicable law. The Trustee shall give public notice of sale to the persons and in the manner prescribed by applicable law. After the lapse of such time as may be required by applicable law, the Trustee, without demand on the Borrower, shall sell the Property at public auction to the highest bidder at the time and place and under the terms designated in the notice of sale in one or more parcels and in such order as Trustee may determine. The Trustee may postpone sale of all or any parcel of the Property by public announcement at the time and place of any previously scheduled sale. The Lender or the Lender's designee may purchase the Property at any sale. The Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser the Trustee's deed conveying the Property so sold without any covenant or warranty, expressed or implied. The recitals in the Trustee's deed shall be prima facie evidence of the truth of the statements made therein. The Trustee shall apply the proceeds of the sale in the following order: (a) to all reasonable costs and expenses of the sale, including, but not limited to, reasonable Trustee's and attorney's fees and costs of title evidence; (b) to all sums secured by this Deed of Trust; and (c) the excess, if any, to the person, persons, entity legally entitled thereto. 14. Borrower's Right to Reinstate. Notwithstanding the Lender's acceleration of the sums secured by this Deed of Trust due to the Borrower's breach, the Borrower shall have the right to have any proceedings begun by the Lender to enforce this Deed of Trust discontinued at any time prior to five days before sale of the Property pursuant to the power of sale contained in this Deed of Trust or at any time prior to entry of a judgment enforcing this Deed of Trust if: (a) the Borrower pays the Lender all sums which would be then due under this Deed of Trust and the Note had no acceleration occurred; (b) the Borrower cures all breaches of any other covenants or agreements of Borrower contained in this Deed of Trust; (c) the Borrower pays all reasonable expenses incurred by the Lender and Trustee in enforcing the covenants and agreements of Borrower in paragraph 13 hereof, including but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees; and (d) the Borrower takes such action as the Lender may reasonably require to assure that the lien of this Deed of Trust, Lender's interest in the Property and the Borrower's obligation to pay the sums secured by this Deed of Trust shall continue unimpaired. Upon such payment and cure by the Borrower, this Deed of Trust and the obligations secured hereby shall remain in full force and effect as if no acceleration had occurred. 15. Nonrecourse. The sole recourse of the Lender under the Loan Documents for repayment of the Note shall be the exercise of its rights against the Property. 16. Lien of Deed of Trust. The Beneficiary agrees that the lien of this Deed of Trust shall be subordinated to any senior lender low-income housing commitment (as such term is defined in Section (42(h)(6)(B) of the internal Revenue Code) (the “Extended Use Agreement”) recorded against the Property, provided that such Extended Use Agreement, by its terms, must terminate upon foreclosure under this Deed of Trust or upon a transfer of the Property by instrument of lieu of foreclosure, in accordance with Section 42(h)(6)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code. 17. Reconveyance. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Deed of Trust, the Lender shall request the Trustee to reconvey the Property and shall surrender this Deed of Trust, and all notes evidencing indebtedness secured by this Deed of Trust to Trustee. Trustee shall reconvey the Property without warranty and without charge to the person or persons legally entitled thereto. Such person or persons shall pay all costs of recordation, if any. 18. Substitute Trustee. At the Lender's option, the Lender may from time to time, appoint a successor trustee to any Trustee appointed hereunder by an instrument executed and acknowledged by the Lender and recorded in the Fresno County Recorder's Office. The instrument shall contain the name of the original the Lender, Trustee and Borrower, the book and page where this Instrument is recorded and the name and address of the successor trustee. The successor trustee shall, without conveyance of the Property, succeed to all the title, powers and duties conferred upon the Trustee herein and by applicable law. This procedure for substitution of trustee shall govern to the exclusion of all other provisions for substitution. 19. Statement of Obligation. The Lender may collect a fee not to exceed fifty dollars and 00/100 ($50.00) for furnishing the statement of obligation as provided by Section 2943 of the Civil Code of California. 20. Event of Default. Prior to declaring or taking any remedy permitted under Loan Documents, (where applicable) the Borrower’s limited partners shall have an additional period of not less than 30 days to cure such alleged default. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a default that cannot with reasonable diligence be remedied or cured within 30 days, the Borrower’s authorized representatives shall have such additional time as reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default, but in no event more than 90 days from the expiration of the initial 30-day period above, and if the Borrower’s limited partners reasonably believe that in order to cure such default. To the extent that there is a conflict between this paragraph 20 and any remedy permitted by the HOME CHDO Agreement, Loan Documents, or Loan, the terms of this paragraph 20 shall control. The following events are each an “Event of Default”: (a) Default in the payment of any sum of principal or interest when due under the Note or any other sum due under the Loan Documents. (b) Failure to maintain insurance as provided in Section 2 hereof. (c) The failure (without cure during the applicable period, if any, for cure) of the Borrower to observe, perform, or discharge any obligation, term, covenant, or condition of any of the Loan Documents, any agreement relating to the Property, or any agreement or instrument between any Loan Party and the Beneficiary. (d) The assignment by the Borrower, as lessor or sublessor, as the case may be, of the rents or the income of the Property or any part of it (other than to Beneficiary) without first obtaining the written consent of the Beneficiary. (e) The following events: (i) the filing of any claim or lien against the Property or any party of it, whether or not the lien is prior to this Deed of Trust, and the continued maintenance of the claim or lien for a period of 30 days without discharge, satisfaction, or adequate bonding in accordance with the terms of this Deed of Trust; (ii) the existence of any interest in the Property other than those of the Borrower, Beneficiary, any tenants of the Borrower, and anyone listed in a title exception approved by the Beneficiary in writing; or (iii) the sale, hypothecation, conveyance, or other disposition of the Property except with the express written approval of the Beneficiary, any of which will be an Event of Default because the Borrower’s obligation to own and operate the Property is one of the inducements to the Beneficiary to make the Loan; (f) Default under any agreement to which the Borrower is a party, which agreement relates to the borrowing of money by the Borrower from Beneficiary. (g) Any presentation or warranty made by any Loan Party or any other Person under this Deed of Trust or in, under, or pursuant to the Loan Documents, is false or misleading in any material respect as of the date on which the representation or warranty was made. (h) Any of the Loan Documents, at any time after their respective execution and delivery and for any reason, cease to be in full force or are declared null and void, or the validity or enforceability is contested by the Borrower or any stockholder or partner of the Borrower, or the Borrower denies that it has any or further liability or obligation under any of the Loan Documents to which it is a party. If one or more Event of Default occurs and is continuing, then the Beneficiary may declare all the Indebtedness to be due and the Indebtedness will become due without any further presentment, demand, protest, or notice of any kind, and the Beneficiary may: (i) in person, by agent, or by a receiver, and without regard to the adequacy of security, the solvency of the Borrower, or the existence of waste, enter on and take possession of the Property or any party of it in its own name or in the name of Trustee, sue for or otherwise collect the rents, issues, and profits, and apply them, less costs and expenses of operation and collection, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, upon the Indebtedness, all in any order that the Beneficiary many determine. The entering on and taking possession of the Property, the collection of rents, issues, and profits, and the application of them will not cure or waive any default or notice of default or invalidate any act done pursuant to the notice; (ii) commence an action to foreclose this Deed of Trust in the manner provided by law for the foreclosure of mortgages of real property; (iii) deliver to the Trustee a written declaration of default and demand for sale, and a written notice of default and election to cause the Property to be sold, which notice the Trustee or the Beneficiary will cause to be filed for record; (iv) with respect to any Personalty, proceed as to both the real and personal property in accordance with the Beneficiary’s rights and remedies in respect of the Land, or proceed to sell the Personalty separately and without regard to the Land in accordance with the Beneficiary’s rights and remedies; or (v) exercise any of these remedies in combination or any other remedy at law or in equity. 21. Protection of Security. If an Event of Default occurs and is continuing, the Beneficiary or Trustee, without notice to or demand upon the Borrower, and without releasing the Borrower from any obligations or defaults may: (a) enter on the Property in any manner and to any extent that either deems necessary to protect the security of this Deed of Trust; (b) appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect, in any manner, the Obligations or the Indebtedness, the security of this Deed of Trust, or the rights or powers of Beneficiary or Trustee; (c) pay, purchase, or compromise any encumbrance, charge, or lien that in the judgment of Beneficiary or Trustee is prior or senior to this deed of Trust; and (d) pay expenses relating to the Property and its sale, employ counsel, and pay reasonable attorneys’ fees. The Borrower agrees to repay on demand all sums expended by the Trustee or the Beneficiary pursuant to this section with interest at the Note Rate of Interest, and those sums, with interest, will be secured by this Deed of Trust. // IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Borrower has executed this Deed of Trust on the day and year set forth above. By signing below, Borrower agrees to the terms and conditions as set forth above. BORROWER: HABITAT FOR HUMANITY FRESNO COUNTY, INC., a California corporation By: Date: Name: Ashley Hedemann Title: Executive Director (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description To Deed of Trust The following is a copy of provisions (1) to (14), inclusive, of the fictitious deed of trust, recorded in each county in California, as stated in the Deed of Trust and incorporated by reference in said Deed of Trust as being a part thereof as if set forth at length therein. To Protect the Security of this Deed of Trust, Trustor (Borrower) Agrees: (1) To keep said property in good condition and repair, not to remove or demolish any building thereon, to complete or restore promptly and in good and workmanlike manner any building which may be constructed, damaged or destroyed thereon and to pay when due all claims for labor performed and materials furnished therefor, to comply with all laws affecting said property or requiring any alterations or improvements to be made thereon, not to commit or permit waste thereof, not to commit, suffer or permit any act upon said property in violations of law to cultivate, irrigate, fertilize, fumigate, prune and do all other acts which from the character or use of said property may be reasonably necessary, the specific enumerations herein not excluding the general. (2) To provide maintain and deliver to the Beneficiary fire insurance satisfactory to and with loss payable to the Beneficiary. The amount collected under any fire or other insurance policy may be applied by the Beneficiary upon indebtedness secured hereby and in such order as the Beneficiary may determine, or at option of the Beneficiary the entire amount so collected or any part thereof may be released to the Borrower. Such application or release shall not cure or waive any default or notice of default hereunder or invalidate any act done pursuant to such notice. (3) To appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect the security hereof or the rights or powers of the Beneficiary or the Trustee, and to pay all costs and expenses including cost of evidence of title and attorney's fees in a reasonable sum, in any such action or proceeding in which the Beneficiary or the Trustee may appear, and in any suit brought by the Beneficiary to foreclose this Deed of Trust. (4) To pay at least ten (10) days before delinquency all taxes and assessments affecting said property, including assessments on appurtenant water stock, when due, all encumbrances, charges, and liens, with interest, on said property or any part thereof, which appear to be prior or superior hereto, all costs, fees and expenses of this Trust. Should the Borrower fail to make any payment or to do any act as herein provided, then the Beneficiary or the Trustee, but without obligation to do so and without notice to or demand upon the Borrower and without releasing the Borrower from any obligation hereof, may make or do the same in such manner and to such extent as either may deem necessary to protect the security hereof the Beneficiary or the Trustee being authorized to enter upon said property for such purposes; appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect the security hereof or the rights or powers of the Beneficiary or the Trustee, pay, purchase, contest or compromise any encumbrance, charge or lien which in the judgment of either appears to be prior or superior hereto, and in exercising any such powers, pay necessary expenses, employ counsel and pay his reasonable fees. (5) To pay immediately and without demand all sums so expended by the Beneficiary or the Trustee, with interest from date of expenditure at the amount allowed by law in effect at the date hereof, and to pay for any statement provided for by law in effect at the date hereof regarding the obligation secured hereby any amount demanded by the Beneficiary not to exceed the maximum allowed by law at the time when said statement is demanded. (6) That any award of damages in connection with any condemnation for public use of or injury to said property or any part thereof is hereby assigned and shall be paid to the Beneficiary who may apply or release such moneys received by it in the same manner and with the same effect as above provided for disposition of proceeds of fire or other insurance. (7) That by accepting payment of any sum secured hereby after its due date, the Beneficiary does not waive its rights either to require prompt payment when due of all other sums so secured or to declare default for failure so to pay. (8) That at any time or from time to time, without liability therefor and without notice, upon written request of the Beneficiary and presentation of this Deed and said Note for endorsement, and without affecting the personal liability of any person for payment of the indebtedness secured hereby, the Trustee may reconvey any part of said property, consent to the making of any map or plot thereof; join in granting any easement thereon; or join in any extension agreement or any agreement subordinating the lien or charge hereof. (9) That upon written request of the Beneficiary state that all sums secured hereby have been paid, and upon surrender of this Deed and said Note to the Trustee for cancellation and retention and upon payment of its fees, the Trustee shall reconvey, without warranty, the property then held hereunder. The recitals in such reconveyance of any matters or facts shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. The grantee in such reconveyance may be described as "The person or persons legally entitled thereto." Five years after issuance of such full reconveyance, the Trustee may destroy said note and this Deed (unless directed in such request to retain them). (10) That as additional security, the Borrower hereby gives to and confers upon the Beneficiary the right, power and authority, during the continuance of these Trusts, to collect the rents, issues and profits of said property, reserving unto the Borrower the right, prior to any default by the Borrower in payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in performance of any agreement hereunder, to collect the rents, issues and profits of said property, reserving unto the Borrower the right, prior to any default by the Borrower in payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in performance of any agreement hereunder, to collect and retain such rents, issues and profits as they become due and payable. Upon any such default, the Beneficiary may at any time without notice, either in person, by agent, or by a receiver to be appointed by a court, and without regard to the adequacy of any security for the indebtedness hereby secured, enter upon and take possession of said property or any part thereof, in its own name sue for or otherwise collect such rents, issues and profits, including those past due and unpaid, and apply the same, less costs and expenses of operation and collection, including reasonable attorney's fees. Upon any indebtedness secured hereby, and in such order as the Beneficiary may determine. The entering upon and taking possession of said property, the collection of such rents, issues and profits and the application thereof as aforesaid, shall not cure or waive any default or notice of default hereunder or invalidate any act done pursuant to such notice. (11) That upon default by the Borrower in payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in performance of any agreement hereunder. The Beneficiary may declare all sums secured hereby immediately due and payable by delivery to the Trustee of written declaration of default and demand for sale and of written notice of default and of election to cause to be sold said property which notice the Trustee shall cause to be filed for record. The Beneficiary also shall deposit with Trustee this Deed, said note and all documents evidencing expenditures secured hereby. After the lapse of such time as may then be required by law following the recordation of said notice of default, and notice of sale having been given as then required by law, the Trustee, without demand on the Borrower, shall sell said property at the time and place fixed by it in said notice of sale, either as a whole or in separate parcels, and in such order as it may determine, at public auction to the highest bidder for cash in lawful money of the United States, payable at time of sale. The Trustee may postpone sale of all or any portion of said property by public announcement at such time and place of sale, and from time to time thereafter may postpone such sale by public announcement at the time fixed by the preceding postponement Trustee shall deliver to such purchaser its deed conveying the property so sold, but without any covenant or warranty, express or implied. The recitals in such deed of any matters or facts shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. Any person, including the Borrower, Trustee, or the Beneficiary as hereinafter defined, may purchase at such sale. After deducting all costs, fees and expenses of the Trustee and of this Trust, including cost of evidence of title in connection with sale, the Trustee shall apply the proceeds of sale to payment of all sums expended under the terms hereof, not then repaid, with accrued interest at the amount allowed by law in effect at the date hereof, all other sums then secured hereby, and the remainder, if any, to the person or persons legally entitled thereto. (12) The Beneficiary, or any successor in ownership of any indebtedness secured hereby, may from time to time, by instrument in writing, substitute a successor or successors to any Trustee named herein or acting hereunder, which instrument, executed by the Beneficiary and duly acknowledged and recorded in the office of the recorder of the county or counties where said property is situated, shall be conclusive proof of proper substitution of such successor Trustee or Trustees, who shall, without conveyance from the Trustee predecessor, succeed to all its title, estate, rights, powers and duties. Said instrument must contain the name of the original Borrower, Trustee, and the Beneficiary hereunder, the book and page where this Deed is recorded and the name and address of the new Trustee. (13) That this Deed applies to, inures to the benefit of, and binds all parties hereto, their heirs, legatees, devisees, administrators, executors, successors, and assigns. The term Beneficiary shall mean the owner and holder, including pledgees, of the note secured hereby whether or not named as the Beneficiary herein in this Deed, whenever the context so requires, the masculine gender includes the feminine and/or neuter, and the singular number includes the plural. (14) That Trustee accepts this Trust when this Deed, duly executed and acknowledged, is made a public record as provided by law. The Trustee is not obligated to notify any party hereto of pending sale under any other Deed of Trust or of any action or proceeding in which the Borrower, Beneficiary or Trustee shall be a party unless brought by Trustee. DO NOT RECORD REQUEST FOR FULL RECONVEYANCE To be used only when note has been paid: To _______________ Title Company, Trustee: Dated _________________________________ The undersigned is the legal owner and holder of all indebtedness secured by the within Deed of Trust. All sums secured by said Deed of Trust have been fully paid and satisfied; and you are hereby requested and directed, on payment to you of any sums owing to you under the terms of said Deed of Trust, to cancel all evidences of indebtedness, secured by said Deed of Trust, delivered to you herewith together with said Deed of Trust, and to reconvey, without warranty, to the parties designated by the terms of said Deed of Trust, the estate now held by you under the same. MAIL RECONVEYANCE TO: By ___________________________________________ Do not lose or destroy this Deed of Trust OR THE NOTE which it secures. Both must be delivered to the Trustee for cancellation before reconveyance will be made. EXHIBIT “H” HOMEBUYER WRITTEN AGREEMENT HOME Investment Partnerships Program Homebuyer Agreement for Mortgage Assistance NOTICE TO HOMEBUYER: This Agreement contains requirements you must fulfill in exchange for the federal assistance you are receiving through the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME Program). You should read each paragraph carefully and ask questions regarding any sections you do not fully understand. This Agreement will be enforced through a loan and mortgage as set forth in Section 1 below. You should be sure that you thoroughly understand these documents before you sign them. This Agreement is entered into this ________, 2023 by and between ______________________, an individual (herein referred to as HOMEBUYER) and the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation (herein referred to as CITY), to provide low-income homebuyer mortgage assistance through funding made available to the CITY from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), HOME Program. The HOME Program assistance enables HOMEBUYER to purchase the residence located at __________________________, Fresno, California. The house must remain HOMEBUYER’s principal place of residence during the entire period of time covered by this Agreement. Section 1: Scope of Program The CITY will loan the HOMEBUYER the sum of __________________________ (Loan), which was provided to the CITY through the HOME Program as a developer subsidy, thus providing for the construction of the house and after transfer of the completed house to the HOMEBUYER represents a direct mortgage subsidy to the HOMEBUYER. The Loan will be protected by mortgage recorded on the property. The Promissory Note and Deed of Trust will be released once the loan is paid in full. Section 2: Affordability Period The period of affordability for the house will be 30 years, based on the amount of the direct subsidy to the HOMEBUYER. During this thirty 30-year period of affordability, the HOMEBUYER must always maintain the house as his/her principal place of residence. The HOMEBUYER should be aware that according to HUD regulations at 24 CFR Part 92, the period of affordability does not begin until the activity is shown as completed in the HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS). Therefore, the 30-year period of affordability shall begin at the recordation of the Commencement of Affordability, which a conformed copy shall be provided to the HOMEBUYER. At the end of the 30-year period of affordability, the Declaration of Restriction will be released. Section 3. Loan and Interest Rate The CITY will provide federal HOME Program funds in the form of a 30-year mortgage at 0% interest to the HOMEBUYER in the sum of ___________________ ($000.00). The HOME mortgage assistance in the form of a Promissory Note will be secured by a Deed of Trust recorded against the property. The HOMEBUYER understands and agrees that the Promissory Note secured by a Deed of Trust is made for the sole purpose of assisting the HOMEBUYER in the purchase of the HOMEBUYER's house as the principal place of residence. Therefore, the HOMEBUYER understands and agrees that the Promissory Note secured by this Deed of Trust shall be immediately due and payable upon the earlier of: (1) any change in residency of the HOMEBUYER from the HOMEBUYER's house which is used as security for the Note described above, unless having obtained the written consent of the CITY; or (2) the sale or transfer, without the CITY's prior written consent, of all or any part of the property, or any interest in the property. A "sale or transfer" means the conveyance of the property or any right, title or interest therein; whether legal, beneficial or equitable; whether voluntary or involuntary; whether by outright sale, deed, installment sale contract, land contract, contract for deed, lease-option contract, or by sale, assignment, or transfer of any beneficial interest in or to any land trust holding title to the property, or by any other method of conveyance of land interest. The CITY and the HOMEBUYER acknowledge and agree that this security instrument is second and subordinate in all respects to the liens, terms, covenants and conditions of the first Deed of Trust and shall not impair the rights of any institutional lender which is the maker of a loan secured by such first deed of trust, or such lender's assignee or successor in interest, to exercise its remedies under the deed of trust in the event of default by the HOMEBUYER. These remedies include the right to foreclosure or exercise a power of sale or to accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure. The terms and provisions of the first Deed of Trust are paramount and controlling, and they supersede any other terms and provisions hereof in conflict therewith. In the event of a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of the first Deed of Trust, any provisions herein or any provisions in any other collateral agreement restricting the use of the property to low-income households or otherwise restricting the HOMEBUYER's ability to sell the property shall have no further force or effect on subsequent owners or purchasers of the property. Any person, including his/her successors or assigns (other than the HOMEBUYER or a related entity of the HOMEBUYER), receiving title to the property through a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of the first Deed of Trust shall receive title to the property free and clear from such restrictions. In the event of a catastrophic occurrence that results in the property having to be sold, the portion of the existing second mortgage lien that results in the combined loan-to-value ratio being more than 100% of the value of the property will be released with no forgiveness of that portion of the debt, and the contemporaneous execution of an unsecured promissory note equal to the amount released from the second mortgage, and a modification agreement that reduces the secured debt of the existing second mortgage by the amount of the new unsecured promissory note. Section 4. Use of HOME Funds The Loan provided to the HOMEBUYER was initially provided to the Developer as a construction loan for the construction of the house located at ____________________, Fresno, California. Developer’s construction loan subsequently converted to a mortgage assistance loan at the transfer of the property title through escrow to the HOMEBUYER, thus representing a direct mortgage subsidy assistance to the HOMEBUYER. Section 5. Principal Residence Requirement This Agreement shall remain in force throughout the 30-year period of affordability so long as the house remains the principal residence of the HOMEBUYER. The house shall remain the HOMEBUYER’s principal place of residence for the entire 30-year period of affordability as evidence by the fully executed and recorded Declaration of Restrictions which contains the affordability covenants which shall run with the land and be recorded against the property. Should the HOMBUYER not maintain the house as his/her principal place of residence, or rent or sell the residence to another party, the HOMEBUYER will be in default of this Agreement and will be required to repay any amount of the HOME loan outstanding as of the date the house is no longer the principal place of residence of the HOMEBUYER. Section 6. Recapture Agreement The CITY requires that HOME funds be recaptured if the house does not continue to be the HOMEBUYER’s principal residence or if all or any part of the property or any interest in it is sold, rented, conveyed, or transferred for the duration of the 30-year period of affordability. If the net proceeds are not sufficient to recapture the full HOME investment plus enable the HOMEBUYER to recover the amount of the HOMEBUYER’s down payment and any capital improvement investment made by the HOMEBUYER since purchase, the CITY may share the net proceeds. The net proceeds are the sales price minus superior loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and any closing costs. In the event of foreclosure, the amount subject to recapture is based on the amount of net proceeds (if any) from the foreclosure sale. The net proceeds may be divided proportionally as set forth in the following mathematical formulas: HOME investment x Net proceeds = HOME recaptured HOME investment + homeowner investment Homeowner investment x Net proceeds = amount to homeowner HOME investment + homeowner investment Section 7. Low-Income Homebuyer The HOMEBUYER attests, and the CITY has verified, that the HOMEBUYER qualifies as a low-income individual or household as defined in the HOME Program regulations and has a total income that does not exceed 80% of the Area Median Income for Fresno County as defined by HUD. Section 8. Appraised Value of Housing Determined to be Modest The CITY certifies that the property appraiser has appraised the value of the house located at __________________, Fresno, California, that is subject of this Agreement is [$ __________]. The CITY has verified that the purchase price of the house does not exceed 95% of the median purchase price of the area, as set forth in 24 CFR Part 92.254(a)(2)(iii). Section 9. Insurance Requirement The HOMEBUYER must at all times during the duration of the Agreement maintain a valid and current insurance policy on the house for the current appraised or assessed value of the house. Failure to maintain a valid and current insurance policy will be considered a breach of this Agreement, and the CITY will have the right to foreclose on its mortgage lien if necessary to protect the HOME Program investment. Section 10. Property Standards Pursuant to the HOME Program rules, the property located at __________________ Fresno, California must meet all State and local housing quality standard and CITY code requirements. If no such standards or codes apply, the property must at a minimum meet the HUD Section 8 Housing Quality Standards/Uniform Physical Conditions Standards. /// HOMEBUYER _____________________________________ ______________________ ______________________, an individual Date (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) CITY OF FRESNO, A California municipal corporation By: Name: Georgeanne A. White, Title: City Manager (Attach notary certificate of acknowledgment) APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZ City Attorney By: _______________________________ Name: Tracy N. Parvanian Title: Supervising Deputy City Attorney ATTEST: TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Name: Title: Deputy City Clerk Exhibit “B” Project Location Maps City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1530 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-E. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Director Capital Projects Department AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services Department BY:FRANCISCO V. MAGOS II, PE, Assistant Director Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division MIKE MOONEYHAM, PE, Licensed Professional Engineer Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division SUBJECT Approve an agreement for professional architectural engineering services with NJA Architecture, of Lodi, CA for $1,072,670, with an $80,000 contingency, for community outreach, infrastructure assessment, master planning, and schematic development services for the West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project (Council District 3). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve a consultant services agreement for professional architectural engineering services with NJA Architecture in the amount of $1,072,670, with an $80,000 contingency, for community outreach, infrastructure assessment, master planning, and schematic development services for the West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project and authorize the Capital Projects Director or designee to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services Department (PARCS) has identified four West Fresno community centers, located in highest-needs neighborhoods, that are in need of varying levels of repair or redevelopment. The proposed project will engage community stakeholders and analyze existing site conditions to identify highest priority community needs and develop a rehabilitation plan for each of the four community centers. The improvements will increase accessibility, provide needed features and amenities, and create vibrant, safe, and comfortable community spaces for the residents of southwest Fresno. Council approval of the consultant agreement between the City and NJA Architecture will initiate the City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MA/NE 6-0 TM ABSENT File #:ID 23-1530 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-E. Council approval of the consultant agreement between the City and NJA Architecture will initiate the professional architectural engineering services necessary to complete the rehabilitation planning project.The project is fully funded with FY 2024 Measure P Expenditure Category 1 funds. Additionally,the consultant services for Frank H.Ball rehabilitation planning will be partially funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. BACKGROUND On January 25,2018,Council adopted the Parks Master Plan (PMP),which provided an assessment of existing park facilities and public needs,and identified prioritization and improvement strategies to repair,maintain,and enhance the City’s park system.Following the passage of the Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Tax Ordinance (Measure P),PARCS has worked to address the findings and recommendations detailed in the PMP and proposes a rehabilitation planning project for four community centers in West Fresno,including Frank H.Ball,Mary Ella Brown,Maxie L.Parks,and Sunset. Frank H.Ball Neighborhood Center,built in 1922,was assigned a “Poor”condition rating in the 2017 PMP and was targeted for tier 2 renovations,recommending strategic enhancements that improve or change the user experience.According to the PMP,these improvements may include site,amenity, and facility upgrades and removal of barriers to access for people with disabilities.In July 2020, Council awarded a construction contract with Next State Construction to remodel existing restroom facilities. Mary Ella Brown Community Center,built in 1973,was assigned a “Poor”condition rating in the 2017 PMP and was targeted for tier 3 renovations,recommending re-master planning and potential complete redevelopment.Since the publication of the 2017 PMP,the City of Fresno partnered with Building Healthy Communities (BHC)to develop a BMX track,which opened in November 2019.In July 2020,Council awarded a construction contract with Next State Construction to remodel existing restroom facilities. Maxie L.Parks Community Center,built in 2010,was assigned a “Fair”condition rating in the 2017 PMP and was targeted for tier 1 renovations,recommending critical park improvements including repair and lifecycle replacement of existing parks,facilities,and amenities.Since the publication of the 2017 PMP,Council approved an agreement with SOMAM,Inc.in April 2022 for design and preparation of construction documents to replace the existing swamp coolers with a split-system Heating,Ventilation,and Air Conditioning (HVAC)system.Additionally,Council approved an agreement with O’Dell Engineering,Inc.in April 2023 for design and preparation of construction documents for play structure improvements. Sunset Community Center,built in 1977,was assigned a “Poor”condition rating in the 2017 PMP and was targeted for tier 1 renovations,recommending critical park improvements including repair and lifecycle replacement of existing parks,facilities,and amenities.Since the publication of the 2017 PMP,no significant renovations or improvements have been completed,with the exception of routine maintenance. The proposed rehabilitation planning project will consist of an inclusive community outreach campaign paired with extensive engineering analysis of the existing conditions at each site,that will City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1530 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-E. campaign paired with extensive engineering analysis of the existing conditions at each site,that will form the basis of design for master planning and schematic development.Community outreach will consist of a series of community meetings and events,an online portal and interactive community board,and a neighborhood-focused survey.Each site will be assessed for code compliance and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)accessibility,in addition to geotechnical and utilities analysis. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)requirements will be identified for each site,however, fulfilling CEQA requirements will be included in the scope of any future projects. The project deliverable will be a final master planning report that will include results from community outreach,summary of site analysis,basis of design,and schematic designs and estimates for each site.The project will coordinate with any ongoing improvement efforts to ensure all in-progress facility enhancements are addressed in the rehabilitation master plan. In accordance with AO 6-19,staff advertised a Request for Qualifications (RFQ)on PlanetBids on July 7,2023,and in The Business Journal on July 12,2023.The RFQ was structured for the prospective consultants to provide detailed information regarding experience of their teams and project approach.Statements of Qualifications (SOQs)were received from two (2)architectural engineering firms by the deadline of July 27,2023,and both consultants were invited to interview with the City.Interviews were conducted on August 15 and August 17,2023,and the consultant’s qualifications were evaluated by a selection committee consisting of five (5)staff members from PARCS and Capital Projects.NJA Architecture was determined to be the most qualified based on consultant interviews.Staff negotiated a fee of $1,072,670,with an $80,000 contingency,for community outreach,infrastructure assessment,master planning,and schematic development services for this project. Staff recommends Council approve the proposed agreement with NJA Architecture in the amount of $1,072,670,with an $80,000 contingency,for the West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project and authorize the Capital Projects Director or designee to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Fresno. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved the proposed agreement as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Design of plans and cost estimates are not a “project”pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines § 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was implemented,because NJA Architecture will subcontract over 15%of the contract price to local businesses. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed project sites are located in Council District 3.The West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Project is funded by Measure P funding included in the FY 2024 Annual Appropriation Resolution adopted June 22,2023.Additionally,the consultant services for Frank H.Ball rehabilitation planning will be partially funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1530 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-E. rehabilitation planning will be partially funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. Attachment(s): Consultant Agreement Vicinity Maps Location Maps City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 1 of 26 AGREEMENT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT (Agreement) is made and entered into, effective on _________________________ between the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (City), and NJ Associates, Inc., dba NJA Architecture, a California corporation (Consultant). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City desires to obtain professional architectural engineering services for the West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project (Project); and WHEREAS, the Consultant is engaged in the business of furnishing services as a licensed architect and hereby represents that it desires to and is professionally and legally capable of performing the services called for by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Consultant acknowledges that this Agreement is subject to the requirements of Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-107 and Administrative Order No. 6-19; and WHEREAS, this Agreement will be administered for the City by its Public Works Director (Director) or designee. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the covenants, conditions, and promises hereinafter contained to be kept and performed by the respective parties, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. Scope of Services. the Consultant shall perform to the satisfaction of the City the services described in Exhibit A, including all work incidental to, or necessary to perform, such services even though not specifically described in Exhibit A. 2. Term of Agreement and Time for Performance. This Agreement shall be effective from the date first set forth above and shall continue in full force and effect through the earlier of complete rendition of the services hereunder or February 1, 2025, subject to any earlier termination in accordance with this Agreement. The services of the Consultant as described in Exhibit A are to commence upon the City’s issuance of a written “Notice to Proceed.” Work shall be undertaken and completed in a sequence assuring expeditious completion, but in any event, all such services shall be completed within four hundred fifty eight (458) consecutive calendar days from such authorization to proceed. 3. Compensation. (a) The Consultant’s sole compensation for satisfactory performance of all services required or rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be a total fee of One Million Seventy Two Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy Dollars ($1,072,670.00), and a contingency amount not to exceed Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000.000) for any DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 2 of 26 additional work rendered pursuant to Subsection (c) below and authorized in writing by the Director. Such fees include all expenses incurred by the Consultant in performance of such services. (b) Detailed statements shall be rendered monthly and will be payable in the normal course of City business. (c) The parties may modify this Agreement to increase or decrea se the scope of services or provide for the rendition of services not required by this Agreement, which modification shall include an adjustment to the Consultant’s compensation. Any change in the scope of services must be made by written amendment to the Agreement signed by an authorized representative for each party. The Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation if services are performed prior to a signed written amendment. 4. Termination, Remedies, and Force Majeure. (a) This Agreement shall terminate without any liability of the City to the Consultant upon the earlier of: (i) the Consultant’s filing for protection under the federal bankruptcy laws, or any bankruptcy petition or petition for receiver commenced by a third party against the Consultant; (ii) seven calendar days prior written notice with or without cause by the City to the Consultant; (iii) the City’s non-appropriation of funds sufficient to meet its obligations hereunder during any City fiscal year of this Agreement, or insufficient funding for the Project; or (iv) expiration of this Agreement. (b) Immediately upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, the Consultant shall (i) immediately stop all work hereunder; (ii) immediately cause any and all of its subcontractors to cease work; and (iii) return to the City any and all unearned payments and all properties and materials in the possession of the Consultant that are owned by the City. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Consultant shall be paid compensation for services satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination. The Consultant shall not be paid for any work or services performed or costs incurred which reasonably could have been avoided. (c) In the event of termination due to failure of the Consultant to satisfactorily perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the City may withhold an amount that would otherwise be payable as an offset to, but not in excess of, the City’s damages caused by such failure. In no event shall any payment by the City pursuant to this Agreement constitute a waiver by the City of any breach of this Agreement which may then exist on the part of the Consultant, nor shall such payment impair or prejudice any remedy available to the City with respect to the breach. (d) Upon any breach of this Agreement by the Consultant, the City may (i) exercise any right, remedy (in contract, law, or equity), or privilege which may be available to it under applicable laws of the State of California or any other applicable law; (ii) proceed by appropriate court action to enforce the terms of the Agreement; and/or (iii) recover all direct, indirect, consequential, economic, and incidental damages for the breach of the Agreement. If it is determined that the City improperly terminated this Agreement for default, such termination shall be deemed a termination for convenience. (e) The Consultant shall provide the City with adequate written assurances of future performance, upon Director’s request, in the event the Consultant DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 3 of 26 fails to comply with any terms or conditions of this Agreement. (f) The Consultant shall be liable for default unless nonperformance is caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of the Consultant and without its fault or negligence such as, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the City in its contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, unusually severe weather, and delays of common carriers. The Consultant shall notify Director in writing as soon as it is reasonably possible after the commencement of any excusable delay, setting forth the full particulars in connection therewith, and shall remedy such occurrence with all reasonable dispatch, and shall promptly give written notice to Director of the cessation of such occurrence. 5. Confidential Information, Ownership of Documents and Copyright License. (a) Any reports, information, or other data prepared or assembled by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Consultant without the prior written approval of the City. During the term of this Agreement, and thereafter, the Consultant shall not, without the prior written consent of the City, disclose to anyone any Confidential Information. The term Confidential Information for the purposes of this Agreement shall include all proprietary and confidential information of the City, including but not limited to business plans, marketing plans, financial information, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, compilations, documents, instruments, models, source or object codes and other information disclosed or submitted, orally, in writing, or by any other med ium or media. All Confidential Information shall be and remain confidential and proprietary in the City. (b) Any and all original sketches, pencil tracings of working drawings, plans, computations, specifications, computer disk files, writings and other documents prepared or provided by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are the property of the City at the time of preparation and shall be turned over to the City upon expiration or termination of the Agreement or default by the Consultant. The Consultant grants the City a copyright license to use such drawings and writings. The Consultant shall not permit the reproduction or use thereof by any other person except as otherwise expressly provided herein. The City may modify the design including any drawings or writings. Any use by the City of the aforesaid sketches, tracings, plans, computations, specifications, computer disk files, writings, and other documents in completed form as to other projects or extensions of this Project, or in uncompleted form, without specific written verification by the Consultant will be at the City’s sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant. The Consultant may keep a copy of all drawings and specifications for its sole and exclusive use. (c) If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Section 5. (d) This Section 5 shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 6. Professional Skill. It is further mutually understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that inasmuch as the Consultant represents to the City that the Consultant and its DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 4 of 26 subcontractors, if any, are skilled in the profession and shall perform in accordance with the standards of said profession necessary to perform the services agreed to be done by it under this Agreement, the City relies upon the skill of the Consultant and any subcontractors to do and perform such services in a skillful manner and the Consultant agrees to thus perform the services and require the same of any subcontractors. Therefore, any acceptance of such services by the City shall not operate as a release of the Consultant or any subcontractors from said professional standards. 7. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law, including California Civil Code section 2782.8, the Consultant shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage), and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees, litigation expenses and cost to enforce this Agreement) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the Consultant, its principals, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement. If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement. 8. Insurance. (a) Throughout the life of this Agreement, the Consultant shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all insurance as required in Exhibit B, which is incorporated into and part of this Agreement, with an insurance company(ies) either (i) admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do b usiness in the State of California and rated no less than “A-VII” in the Best’s Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) as may be authorized in writing by the City’s Risk Manager or designee at any time and in its sole discretion. The required policies of insurance as stated in Exhibit B shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those amounts stated therein. However, the insurance limits available to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds, shall be the greater of the minimum limits specified therein or the full limit of any insurance proceeds to the named insured. (b) If at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension, the Consultant or any of its subcontractors/sub-consultants fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all services and work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to the Consultant shall be withheld until notice is received by the City that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to the City. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for the City to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by the City pursuant to this section shall in any way relieve the Consultant of its responsibilities under DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 5 of 26 this Agreement. The phrase “fail to maintain any required insurance” shall include, without limitation, notification received by the City that an insurer has commenced proceedings, or has had proceedings commenced against it, indicating that the insurer is insolvent. (c) The fact that insurance is obtained by the Consultant shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of the Consultant, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify the City shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of the Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under the supervision of the Consultant, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-consultants, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. (d) If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall require each subcontractor/sub- consultant to provide insurance protection, as an additional insured, to the City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers in accordance with the terms of this section, except that any required certificates and applicable endorsements shall be on file with the Consultant and the City prior to the commencement of any services by the subcontract or. The Consultant and any subcontractor/sub-consultant shall establish additional insured status for the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers by using Insurance Service Office (ISO) Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 04 13 and CG 20 37 04 13 or by an executed manuscript company endorsement providing additional insured status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85. 9. Conflict of Interest and Non-Solicitation. (a) Prior to the City’s execution of this Agreement, the Consultant shall complete a City of Fresno conflict of interest disclosure statement in the form as set forth in Exhibit C. During the term of this Agreement, the Consultant shall have the obligation and duty to immediately notify the City in writing of any change to the information provided by the Consultant in such statement. (b) The Consultant shall comply, and require its subcontractors to comply, with all applicable (i) professional canons and requirements governing avoida nce of impermissible client conflicts; and (ii) federal, state, and local conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, California Government Code Section 1090 et. seq., the California Political Reform Act (California Government Code Section 87100 et. seq.), the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning disclosure and disqualification (2 California Code of Regulations Section 18700 et. seq.) and Section 4-112 of the Fresno Municipal Code (Ineligibility to Compete). At any time, upon written request of the City, the Consultant shall provide a written opinion of its legal counsel and that of any subcontractor that, after a due diligent inquiry, the Consultant and the respective subcontractor(s) are in full compliance with all laws and regulations. The Consultant shall take, and require its subcontractors to take, reasonable steps to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. Upon discovery of any facts giving rise to the appearance of a conflict of interest, the Consultant shall immediately notify the City of DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 6 of 26 these facts in writing. (c) In performing the work or services to be provided hereunder, the Consultant shall not employ or retain the services of any person while such person either is employed by the City or is a member of any the City council, commission, board, committee, or similar the City body. This requirement may be waived in writing by the City Manager, if no actual or potential conflict is involved. (d) The Consultant represents and warrants that it has not paid or agreed to pay any compensation, contingent or otherwise, direct, or indirect, to solicit or procure this Agreement or any rights/benefits hereunder. (e) Neither the Consultant, nor any of the Consultant’s subcontractors performing any services on this Project, shall bid for, assist anyone in the preparation of a bid for, or perform any services pursuant to, any other contract in connection with this Project. The Consultant and any of its subcontractors shall have no interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract with a third party in connection with this Project unless such interest is in accordance with all applicable law and fully disclosed to and approved by the City Manager, in advance and in writing. If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed or services to be provided under this Agreement, the Consultant shall include the provisions of this Section 9 in each subcontract and require its subcontractors to comply therewith. (f) This Section 9 shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 10. Recycling Program. In the event the Consultant maintains an office or operates a facility(ies), or is required herein to maintain or operate same, within the incorporated limits of the City of Fresno, the Consultant at its sole cost and expense shall: (a) Immediately establish and maintain a viable and on going recycling program, approved by the City’s Solid Waste Management Division, for each office and facility. Literature describing the City recycling programs is available from the City’s Solid Waste Management Division and by calling City of Fresno Recycling Hotline at (559) 621- 1111. (b) Immediately contact the City’s Solid Waste Management Division at (559) 621-1452 and schedule a free waste audit and cooperate with such Division in their conduct of the audit for each office and facility. (c) Cooperate with and demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City’s Solid Waste Management Division the establishment of the recycling program in paragraph (a) above and the ongoing maintenance thereof. 11. General Terms. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, all notices expressly required of the City within the body of this Agreement, and not otherwise specifically provided for, shall be effective only if signed by the Director or designee. (b) Records of the Consultant’s expenses pertaining to the Project shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis and shall be available to the City or DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 7 of 26 its authorized representatives upon request during regular business hours throughout the life of this Agreement and for a period of three years after final payment or, if longer, for any period required by law. In addition, all books, documents, papers, and records of the Consultant pertaining to the Project shall be available for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions for the same period of time. If any litigation, claim, negotiations, audit, or other action is commenced before the expiration of said time period, all records shall be retained and made available to the City until such action is resolved, or until the end of said time period whichever shall later occur. If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this paragraph. This Section 11(b) shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. (c) Prior to execution of this Agreement by the City, the Consultant shall have provided evidence to the City that the Consultant is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required). If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the work or services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall require each subcontractor to provide evidence to the City that subcontractor is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required) before beginning work. 12. Nondiscrimination. (a) To the extent required by controlling federal, state, and local law, the Consultant shall not employ discriminatory practices in the provision of services, employment of personnel, or in any other respect on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Subject to the foregoing and during the performance of this Agreement, the Consultant agrees as follows: (b) The Consultant will comply with all applicable laws and regulations providing that no person shall, on the grounds of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity made possible by or resulting from this Agreement. (c) The Consultant will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. The Consultant shall ensure that applicants are employed, and the employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Such requirement shall apply to the Consultant’s employment practices including, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 8 of 26 and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Consultant agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this nondiscrimination clause. (d) The Consultant will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of The Consultant in pursuit hereof, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. (e) The Consultant will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice advising such labor union or workers' representatives of the Consultant’s commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. (f) If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Section 12. 13. Independent Contractor. (a) In the furnishing of the services provided for herein, the Consultant is acting solely as an independent contractor. Neither the Consultant, nor any of its officers, agents, or employees shall be deemed an officer, agent, employee, joint venturer, partner or associate of the City for any purpose. The City shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which the Consultant shall perform its work and functions. However, the City shall retain the right to administer this Agreement so as to verify that the Consultant is performing its obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof. (b) This Agreement does not evidence a partnership or joint venture between the Consultant and the City. The Consultant shall have no authority to bind the City absent the City’s express written consent. Except to the extent otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Consultant shall bear its own costs and expenses in pursuit thereof. (c) Because of its status as an independent contractor, the Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to the City employees. The Consultant shall be solely liable and responsible for all payroll and tax withholding and for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees all employee benefits including, without limitation, health, welfare, and retirement benefits. In addition, together with its other obligations under this Agreement, the Consultant shall be solely responsible, indemnify, defend and save the City harmless from all matters relating to employment and tax withholding for and payment of the Consultant’s employees, including, without limitation, (i) compliance with Social Security and unemployment insurance withholding, payment of workers’ compensation benefits, and all other laws and regulations governing matters of employee withholding, taxes and payment; and (ii) any claim of right or interest in the City employment benefits, entitlements, programs and/or funds offered employees of the City whether arising by reason of any common law, de facto, leased, or co-employee rights or other theory. It is DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 9 of 26 acknowledged that during the term of this Agreement, the Consultant may be providing services to others unrelated to the City or to this Agreement. 14. Notices. Any notice required or intended to be given to either party under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be duly given if delivered personally, transmitted by facsimile followed by telephone confirmation of receipt, or sent by United States registered or certified mail, with postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the party to which notice is to be given at the party's address set forth on the signature page of this Agreement or at such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by written notice. Notices served by United States mail in the manner above described shall be deemed sufficiently served or given at the time of the mailing thereof. 15. Binding. Subject to Section 16, below, once this Agreement is signed by all parties, it shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, all parties, and each parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns, transferees, agents, servants, employees, and representatives. 16. Assignment. (a) This Agreement is personal to the Consultant and there shall be no assignment by the Consultant of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. Any attempted assignment by the Consultant, its successors, or assigns, shall be null and void unless approved in writing by the City Manager or designee. (b) The Consultant hereby agrees not to assign the payment of any monies due the Consultant from the City under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual(s), corporation(s) or entity(ies). The City retains the right to pay any and all monies due the Consultant directly to the Consultant. 17. Compliance With Law. In providing the services required under this Agreement, the Consultant shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California and the City, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by federal, state, region al, or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the term of this Agreement. 18. Waiver. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. No provisions of this Agreement may be waived unless in writing and signed by all parties to this Agreement. Waiver of any one provision herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision herein. 19. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 10 of 26 the laws of the State of California, excluding, however, an y conflict of laws rule which would apply the law of another jurisdiction. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement and any rights and duties hereunder shall be Fresno County, California. 20. Headings. The section headings in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not be construed or held in any way to explain, modify, or add to the interpretation or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. 21. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. The invalidity, or unenforceability of any one provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions. 22. Interpretation. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement in its final form is the result of the combined efforts of the parties and that, should any provision of this Agreement be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing this Agreement in favor of or against either party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning. 23. Attorney's Fees. If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses. 24. Exhibits. Each exhibit and attachment referenced in this Agreement is, by the reference, incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement. 25. Precedence of Documents. In the event of any conflict between the body of this Agreement and any exhibit or attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Agreement shall control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the exhibit or attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any exhibit or attachment hereto which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the parties, provided for within the body of this Agreement, shall be null and void. 26. Cumulative Remedies. No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. 27. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. The rights, interests, duties, and obligations defined within this Agreement are intended for the specific parties hereto as identified in the preamble of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Agreement, it is not intended that any rights or interests in this Agreement benefit or flow to the interest of any third parties. DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 11 of 26 28. Extent of Agreement. Each party acknowledges that they have read and fully understand the contents of this Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be modified only by written instrument duly authorized and executed by both the City and the Consultant. 29. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized and directed to execute and implement this Agreement. The previous sentence is not intended to delegate any authority to the City Manager to administer the Agreement, any delegation of authority must be expressly included in the Agreement. [SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON THE NEXT PAGE.] DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 12 of 26 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at Fresno, California, on the day and year first above written. CITY OF FRESNO, A California municipal corporation By: Randall W. Morrison, PE, Director Capital Projects Department ATTEST: TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy No signature of City Attorney required. Standard Document #DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee – Contingency (09-2023) has been used without modification, as certified by the undersigned. By: Mike Mooneyham, PE Licensed Professional Engineer REVIEWED BY: Francisco Magos II, PE, Assistant Director Capital Projects Department NJ Associates, Inc., A California corporation By: Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., Board Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres.) By: Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) Any Applicable Professional License: Number: Name: Date of Issuance: Addresses: CITY: City of Fresno Attention:Mike Mooneyham, Licensed Professional Engineer 2600 Fresno Street, Room 4016 Fresno, CA 93721-3623 Phone: (559) 621-8623 E-mail: mike.mooneyham@fresno.gov CONSULTANT: NJ Associates, Inc., dba NJA Architecture Attention: Nick Seward, Owner, Architect 212 West Pine Street, Suite 1 Lodi, CA 95240 Phone: (209) 400-6080 E-mail: nick@njaarchitecture.com Nick Seward Owner, CEO Nick Seward DEC. 2020 C38947 John Vierra Owner, President DPW-S Eng. CSA., Short Form Total Fee - Contingency (09-2023) Page 13 of 26 Attachments: 1. Exhibit A - Scope of Services 2. Exhibit B - Insurance Requirements 3. Exhibit C - Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 14 of 26 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant Service Agreement between City of Fresno (City) and NJ Associates, Inc. (Consultant) West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project Project Scope The City of Fresno has identified four (4) West Fresno community centers, located in highest- needs neighborhoods, that are in need of varying levels of repair or redevelopment. This project will engage community stakeholders and analyze existing site conditions to identify highest priority community needs and develop a rehabilitation plan for each of the four (4) community centers – Mary Ella Brown, Frank H. Ball, Maxie L. Parks, and Sunset. The improvements will increase accessibility, provide needed features and amenities, and create vibrant, safe, and comfortable community spaces for the residents of southwest Fresno. The project will consist of an inclusive community outreach campaign paired with extensive engineering analysis of the existing conditions at each site, that will form the basis of design for master planning and schematic development. Community outreach, site analysis, and master planning activities and deliverables are detailed further in Scope of Services. Scope of Services • Assessment of four (4) existing community center buildings and associated outdoor areas • Analysis and Basis-of-Design recommendations for each existing location • Community Outreach campaigns targeting all four (4) sites • Public Meetings introducing the project, initial concepts, design revisions, and final recommendations • Analysis of requirements and recommendations for future Site Approval • Schematic Design concepts and systems narratives for all four (4) locations • ROM Cost Estimates for all four (4) locations • Master Plan Report for all four (4) locations, with recommendations for implementation • A total of thirteen (13) community meetings and five (5) in-person meetings with City staff. Scope and schedule of in-person meetings to be determined by project team as necessary. • Virtual weekly or bi-weekly meetings (estimated 30 minutes each) as determined by project team Task #1: Community Outreach • One (1) City kickoff meeting to review and discuss goals and objectives • Thirteen (13) community meetings, as follows: o Three (3) focus group meetings to present the project, gather support for collaboration with the community, and get stakeholders to be project champions o One (1) community kickoff meeting o Eight (8) site-specific meetings (two (2) per site) o One (1) final presentation meeting DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 15 of 26 • Analyze the project’s goals and objectives, identify key stakeholders and target audiences for engagement, and create an inclusive strategy. During this task, Consultant will determine appropriate channels for outreach, such as in-person events, social media, print media, radio, television, and mail. Consultant will also prepare a detailed plan for conducting community meetings, events, and engagement opportunities. • Organize and facilitate stakeholder and community meetings to introduce the project and gather additional information. During these meetings Consultant will present design concepts and recommendations. Feedback received will be documented and incorporated into the master plan. Along with the meetings the Consultant will develop and print materials, such as presentation boards, surveys, flyers, fact sheets, and door hangers. The materials and engagement opportunities will be available in multiple languages, including English, Spanish, Hmong, Punjabi, and American Sign Language (ASL), and distributed to the local communities surrounding each of the four (4) project sites. • Manage comprehensive outreach efforts to reach project goals and lead community meetings. • Provide customer service training for staff that reflects the outreach needs of the project. • Implement Feedback Campaign o Distribute flyers to key accessibility touchpoints o Leverage current advertising o Facilitate and manage ad buy based on targeted impact areas • Facilitate Interactive Community Listening Sessions (Community Meetings) o Listening Session Outreach, postcards and doorhangers (including postage and distribution), social media posts and ad asset creation (both for initial input and plan feedback) o Determine the locations and dates o Build presentation o Responsible for meeting experience including managing A/V, sign-in table, seating set up, and acting as facilitator o Develop on-site materials including a sign-in sheet, handout, speaker/comment/survey cards and signage o Record sessions and provide a transcript of community interaction o Summarize findings and create a community feedback report o Ensure multilingual interpretation & support (Spanish, Punjabi, Hmong & ASL) • An “Ad Buy Package” to support Task 1 Community Outreach as recommended by the Consultant and as shown below is included in the total professional services fee. Includes design, printing, content creation, translation as necessary, and distribution/mailing. o Postage-paid postcards: 15,397 pieces o Door hangers: 15,000 pieces o Pocketguide: 75,000 pieces o Flyers (8.5”x11”): 73,000 pieces o Bus shelter poster printing: 85 pieces o Digital ads o Local media print ads (Fresno Bee, La Abeja, Vida en el Valle): DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 16 of 26 o Local media native content o Local media digital ads (Hmong Daily News, Fresno Bee, ABC30) o Social media boosting o Gas station video advertising o Radio (Spanish) Task #2: Customer Data Collection • Develop surveys tailored to gather feedback from residents within a ½ mile radius from each of the four (4) community centers. To supplement survey data, interviews may be conducted as necessary. Following the data collection, Consultant will perform qualitative and quantitative analysis on the gathered data. The findings and analysis will be presented in the master plan report and at community meetings. • City to provide existing collateral, including plans and surveys, Environmental Assessments, Masterplans, and community feedback documentation. • Develop, implement, process, and analyze community feedback • Ongoing Account Management including regular team huddles and virtual meetings • Initial review of current survey feedback, online reviews, staff insight, ParkScore Index and outreach • Conduct an online survey and provide social media support by creating social media post/poll series • Manage and monitor media interaction including release and media alerts for listening sessions, open houses and survey release dates • Provide complete feedback report, findings and recommendations to team Task #3: Material Preparation • Prepare designs for each site and presentation collateral to communicate concepts. • Develop and print materials, presentation boards, surveys, flyers, fact sheets, and door hangers. Engagement materials will be available in multiple languages, including English, Spanish, Hmong, Punjabi, and American Sign Language (ASL), and distributed to the local communities surrounding each of the four (4) project sites. • Coordinate with the City to prepare architectural design concepts and presentation materials • Coordinate with the City to prepare landscape concepts and presentation materials • Manage creation of presentation materials • Identify audience, key messages, resources available and build out timeline • Build and establish additional resources including: o Microsite or Online Portal with Interactive Idea Board (Social PinPoint - Includes Translations & Single Sign-on) o Hotline providing monthly reports to staff o Pocketguide with QR code for staff (75,000 copies) o Campaign Look (Including Button for Website & Styleguide) o Initial Advertising Assets o Produce Video Introduction to the Project and Feedback Process DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 17 of 26 o Finalize and Negotiate Ad Buy Recommendations – Including Transit, Digital, Multilingual print, and Spanish Radio Ads (Using Recommended Ad Buy Option) o Translation of all content into (Spanish, Punjabi, Hmong & ASL) Task #4: Infrastructure Evaluation • Proposal includes a maximum of two (2) visits to each project site per subconsultant. • Consultant will conduct a comprehensive assessment of existing infrastructure at each community center, including deferred maintenance issues, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, and structural elements, concrete flatwork, grading, and greenspace assessments. During this task Consultant will also evaluate accessibility conditions and identify areas for improvement. This step is critical in assessing each site for code compliance and identifying necessary repairs or improvements. • Assess and evaluate each of the four (4) existing community center sites with respect to existing landscape, civil, structural, mechanical, plumbing, fire protection, electrical, and accessibility conditions • Survey four (4) existing sites to identify landscape assets, repairs, and deficiencies • Assess site conditions for each of the four (4) locations, identifying site infrastructure needs • Determine existing structural systems, deficiencies, required safety upgrades and repairs • Assess existing mechanical equipment and distribution, recommend replacements or repairs • Review existing plumbing fixtures and distribution systems for each of four (4) project sites • Identify and assess existing fire protection measures for each of the four (4) community centers • Assess existing electrical equipment, service, and distribution, recommend upgrades or repairs • Review existing access compliance conditions and required 20% improvement priorities Task #5: Site Approval Analysis • Site approval analysis includes identifying regulatory requirements to allow development and performing geotechnical site investigations as required for each community center site. Consultant will work with the City to review existing documentation and determine development requirements for each site. • Identify regulatory requirements and develop recommendations for future implementation • Develop geotechnical reports for each of the four (4) project sites based upon findings • Develop site approval recommendations Task #6: Basis-of-Design • Consultant will summarize and analyze data from site assessments, recreation staff interviews, and community feedback to identify critical needs, long-range goals, project objectives, and implementation strategies. • Basis-of-design documentation will allow the team to provide recommendations for community center improvements. Consultant will develop recommendations for each community center site, considering the overall West Fresno Community Center system. • Create conceptual design framework prioritizing objectives, and balancing needs for the entire team DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 18 of 26 • Develop landscape design criteria responding to the unique circumstances of each site • Make recommendations for site infrastructure upgrades to facilitate long-term viability • Recommend upgrades or repairs to address structural safety and code issues for each building • Develop strategy for repair or replacement to optimize mechanical systems for each building. • Develop recommendations for repair or replacement of plumbing infrastructure and equipment • Provide recommendations to address existing fire protection infrastructure and ensure safety • Develop strategy for electrical repair or replacement to optimize efficiency and ensure safety • Develop geotechnical report with recommendations for site and building components • Provide analysis and recommendations to meet accessibility requirements for each site Task #7: Design Options • Develop designs, proposing multiple options ranging from minor to major improvements, with the potential to recommend complete demolition and replacement where appropriate. • Identify essential code-level improvements required for each option. • Develop architectural design options for each site and building • Develop conceptual landscape plans in coordination with site and building recommendations. • Provide conceptual site and infrastructure improvements in coordination with building plans. • Develop structural options in coordination with architecture and engineering recommendations. • Develop HVAC system recommendations. • Develop plumbing system improvements. • Provide conceptual fire protection recommendations to support proposed options. • Develop electrical system improvements. • Ensure Americans with Disability Act (ADA) access compliance for proposed options. Task #8: Schematic Design • Following the decision on the provided options, Consultant will create 30% level schematic design drawings and related documents to demonstrate the concept and scope of the proposed improvements and their relationship to project components, including conceptual site plans, landscape plans, floor plans, and elevations. Once completed, Consultant will submit the drawings for review and acceptance by the City staff. • Develop conceptual floor plan(s) and exterior building elevation design studies for review by City • Develop conceptual landscape site plans and planting palette exhibits for review by City • Develop conceptual site plans, utility plans, and drainage plans • Develop structural system narratives and conceptual diagrams DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 19 of 26 • Develop mechanical system narratives, conceptual zoning, and distribution diagrams • Develop plumbing system narratives and conceptual diagrams • Develop fire protection system narratives and requirements • Develop electrical system narratives and conceptual improvements • Develop access compliance narratives and recommendations • Include a maximum of three (3) revisions to schematic design concepts (during the period between the second community meetings and the final presentation meeting). • Provide three (3) conceptual renderings per site, including an aerial view and project feature with material finishes Task #9: Cost Estimates • Develop a summary of construction cost estimates for each design option for each site, considering cost escalation, as shown below. The cost estimates will also include anticipated maintenance costs for each option. o One (1) initial conceptual cost estimate, following assessment and recommendation for each of four (4) sites o One (1) ROM progress cost estimate, including design options for each of four (4) sites o One (1) final schematic design cost estimate for each of four (4) sites Task #10: Master Plan • Consultant will provide a comprehensive master plan report covering all four (4) community center sites, incorporating public feedback and existing infrastructure, to provide effective and inclusive spaces for the community: o Narrative report and conceptual plans diagramming program elements, amenities, and relationships. o Graphics, data, and narrative basis-of-design recommendations for each of four (4) sites. • Develop an overarching architectural vision with implementation strategies to best serve the City. • Deliver welcoming landscape concepts prioritizing safety, water, and low-maintenance design • Present site strategies capitalizing on existing infrastructure and long-term improvement. • Identify existing structural systems and summarize recommendations for repair or replacement. • Present assessment of existing HVAC infrastructure and recommended improvements. • Identify existing plumbing deficiencies and summarize recommended upgrades. • Develop a narrative of existing fire protection infrastructure and recommended improvements. • Assess existing electrical systems and summarize recommended repairs or replacements. DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 20 of 26 Compensation Compensation for all services described above will be based on the fee structure as shown below. Fees will be billed monthly in accordance with the work completed. Task 1: Community Outreach (18%) $ 192,860.00 • Task 1A: Mary Ella Brown: $48,215.00 • Task 1B: Frank H. Ball: $48,215.00 • Task 1C: Maxie Parks: $48,215.00 • Task 1D: Sunset: $48,215.00 Task 2: Data Collection (5%) $ 54,770.00 • Task 2A: Mary Ella Brown: $13,692.50 • Task 2B: Frank H. Ball: $13,692.50 • Task 2C: Maxie Parks: $13,692.50 • Task 2D: Sunset: $13,692.50 Task 3: Material Preparation (22%) $ 237,020.00 • Task 3A: Mary Ella Brown: $59,255.00 • Task 3B: Frank H. Ball: $59,255.00 • Task 3C: Maxie Parks: $59,255.00 • Task 3D: Sunset: $59,255.00 Task 4: Infrastructure Evaluation (12%) $ 131,050.00 • Task 4A: Mary Ella Brown: $30,812.50 • Task 4B: Frank H. Ball: $35,312.50 • Task 4C: Maxie Parks: $29,612.50 • Task 4D: Sunset: $35,312.50 Task 5: Site Approval Analysis (2%) $ 24,800.00 • Task 5A: Mary Ella Brown: $6,200.00 • Task 5B: Frank H. Ball: $6,200.00 • Task 5C: Maxie Parks: $6,200.00 • Task 5D: Sunset: $6,200.00 Task 6: Basis of Design (4%) $ 46,200.00 • Task 6A: Mary Ella Brown: $11,550.00 • Task 6B: Frank H. Ball: $11,550.00 • Task 6C: Maxie Parks: $11,550.00 • Task 6D: Sunset: $11,550.00 Task 7: Design Options (10%) $ 105,300.00 • Task 7A: Mary Ella Brown: $26,325.00 • Task 7B: Frank H. Ball: $26,325.00 • Task 7C: Maxie Parks: $26,325.00 • Task 7D: Sunset: $26,325.00 Task 8: Schematic Design (17%) $ 180,370.00 • Task 8A: Mary Ella Brown: $45,092.50 • Task 8B: Frank H. Ball: $45,092.50 • Task 8C: Maxie Parks: $45,092.50 • Task 8D: Sunset: $45,092.50 DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit A Page 21 of 26 Task 9: Cost Estimates (4%) $ 45,400.00 • Task 9A: Mary Ella Brown: $11,350.00 • Task 9B: Frank H. Ball: $11,350.00 • Task 9C: Maxie Parks: $11,350.00 • Task 9D: Sunset: $11,350.00 Task 10: Master Plan (5%) $ 54,900.00 • Task 10A: Mary Ella Brown: $13,725.00 • Task 10B: Frank H. Ball: $13,725.00 • Task 10C: Maxie Parks: $13,725.00 • Task 10D: Sunset: $13,725.00 Fee Summary for Tasks 1-10 by Site • Mary Ella Brown $ 266,217.50 • Frank H. Ball $ 270,717.50 • Maxie L. Parks $ 265,017.50 • Sunset $ 270,717.50 TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEE $ 1,072,670.00 There will be no additional services or fees without prior written authorization by the City. Schedule Time allotted for each task is summarized below. All tasks are expected to be completed within 365 calendar days of contract award, unless additional services are required as noted below. Task 1: Community Outreach 289 calendar days* Task 2: Data Collection 304 calendar days* Task 3: Material Preparation 91 calendar days Task 4: Infrastructure Evaluation 46 calendar days Task 5: Site Approval Analysis 256 calendar days Task 6: Basis of Design 243 calendar days Task 7: Design Options 120 calendar days Task 8: Schematic Design 91 calendar days Task 9: Cost Estimate 212 calendar days Task 10: Master Plan 60 calendar days *Timeline for Community Outreach and Data Collection is dependent on scheduling with community stakeholders and amount of feedback received. Additional community meetings may be held if needed as determined by the City. DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit B Page 22 of 26 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Consultant Service Agreement between City of Fresno (City) and NJ Associates, Inc. (Consultant) West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. The most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form CG 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of your business operations. The Commercial General Liability policy shall be written on an occurrence form and shall provide coverage for “bodily injury,” “property damage” and “personal and advertising injury” with coverage for premises and operations (including the use of owned and non-owned equipment), products and completed operations, and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the Agreement) with limits of liability not less than those set forth under “Minimum Limits of Insurance.” 2. The most current version of Commercial Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of automobiles in the course of your business operations. The Automobile Policy shall be written on an occurrence form and shall provide coverage for all owned, hired, and non -owned automobiles or other licensed vehicles (Code 1- Any Auto). 3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. 4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance appropriate to the Consultant’s profession. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE The Consultant, or any party the Consultant subcontracts with, shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those set forth below. However, insurance limits available to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds, shall be the greater of the minimum limits specified herein or the full limit of any insurance proceeds available to the named insured: 1. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY: (i) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage; (ii) $1,000,000 per occurrence for personal and advertising injury; (iii) $2,000,000 aggregate for products and completed operations; and, (iv) $2,000,000 general aggregate applying separately to the work performed under the Agreement. DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit B Page 23 of 26 2. COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE as required by the State of California with statutory limits. 4. EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY: (i) $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury; (ii) $1,000,000 disease each employee; and, (iii) $1,000,000 disease policy limit. 5. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (Errors and Omissions): (i) $1,000,000 per claim/occurrence; and, (ii) $2,000,000 policy aggregate. UMBRELLA OR EXCESS INSURANCE In the event the Consultant purchases an Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) to meet the “Minimum Limits of Insurance,” this insurance policy(ies) shall “follow form” and afford no less coverage than the primary insurance policy(ies). In addition, such Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) shall also apply on a primary and non -contributory basis for the benefit of the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS The Consultant shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policy(ies) required herein and the Consultant shall also be responsible for payment of any self- insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to on the Certificate of Insurance, and approved by, the City’s Risk Manager or designee. At the option of the City’s Risk Manager or designee, either: (i) The insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self - insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (ii) The Consultant shall provide a financial guarantee, satisfactory to the City’s Risk Manager or designee, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. At no time shall the City be responsible for the payment of any deductibles or self- insured retentions. OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS/ENDORSEMENTS The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds. The Consultant shall establish additional insured status for the City and for all ongoing and completed operations by use of ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 04 13 DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit B Page 24 of 26 and CG 20 37 04 13 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement providing additional insured status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85. 2. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits and coverage shall be available to the Additional Insured. 3. For any claims relating to this Agreement, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. The Consultant shall establish primary and non-contributory status by using ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement that provides primary and non-contributory status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13. The Workers’ Compensation insurance policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provision: the Consultant and its insurer shall waive any right of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. If the Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance policy is written on a claims- made form: 1. The retroactive date must be shown and must be before the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by the Consultant. 2. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement work, or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first, or, in the alternative, the policy shall be endorsed to provide not less than a five- year discovery period. 3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims- made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by the Consultant, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement work or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first. 4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review. 5. These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement. All policies of insurance required herein shall be endorsed to provide that the coverage DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit B Page 25 of 26 shall not be cancelled, non-renewed, reduced in coverage or in limits except after 30 calendar days written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. The Consultant is also responsible for providing written notice to the City under the same terms and conditions. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage or in limits, the Consultant shall furnish the City with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for the City, the Consultant shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy not less than 15 calendar days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy. Should any of the required policies provide that the defense costs are paid within the Limits of Liability, thereby reducing the available limits by any defense costs, then the requirement for the Limits of Liability of these policies will be twice the above stated limits. The fact that insurance is obtained by the Consultant shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of the Consultant, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of the Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under superv ision of the Consultant, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-consultants, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE The Consultant shall furnish the City with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required hereunder. All certificates and applicable endorsements are to be received and approved by the City’s Risk Manager or designee prior to the City’s execution of the Agreement and before work commences. All non-ISO endorsements amending policy coverage shall be executed by a licensed and authorized agent or broker. Upon request of the City, the Consultant shall immediately furnish City with a complete copy of any insurance policy required under this Agreement, including all endorsements, with said copy certified by the underwriter to be a true and correct copy of the original policy. This requirement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. SUBCONTRACTORS - If the Consultant subcontracts any or all of the services to be performed under this Agreement, the Consultant shall require, at the discretion of the City Risk Manager or designee, subcontractor(s) to enter into a separate side agreement with the City to provide required indemnification and insurance protection. Any required side agreement(s) and associated insurance documents for the subcontractor must be reviewed and preapproved by the City Risk Manager or designee. If no side agreement is requires, the Consultant shall require and verify that subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein and the Consultant shall ensure that the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are additional insureds. The subcontractors’ certificates and endorsements shall be on file with the Consultant, and the City, prior to commencement of any work by the subcontractor. DPW-S Eng. CSA, Short Form Total Fee Contingency (09-2023) Exhibit C Page 26 of 26 EXHIBIT C DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST West Fresno Community Centers Rehabilitation Planning Project YES* NO 1 Are you currently in litigation with the City of Fresno or any of its agents? ☐ ☐ 2 Do you represent any firm, organization, or person who is in litigation with the City of Fresno? ☐ ☐ 3 Do you currently represent or perform work for any clients who do business with the City of Fresno? ☐ ☐ 4 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, owners or investors in a business which does business with the City of Fresno, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Fresno? ☐ ☐ 5 Are you or any of your principals, managers, or professionals, related by blood or marriage to any City of Fresno employee who has any significant role in the subject matter of this service? ☐ ☐ 6 Do you or any of your subcontractors have, or expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract in connection with this Project? ☐ ☐ *If the answer to any question is yes, please explain in full below. Explanation: Signature Date Name Company Address City, State, Zip ☐Additional page(s) attached. X X X X X X 10/11/2023 Nick Seward NJ Associates, Inc. 212 W Pine St., Suite 1 Lodi, CA 95240 Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Sunset Community Center N 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Project ID: PC00322Council District: 3 Sunset Community CenterVICINITY MAP DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS District 3 City_Limits CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Frank H Ball Neighborhood Center N 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Project ID: PC00325Council District: 3 Frank H Ball Neighborhood CenterVICINITY MAP DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS District 3 City_Limits CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Maxie L. Parks Community Center N 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Project ID: PC00327Council District: 3 Maxie L. Parks Community CenterVICINITY MAP DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS District 3 City_Limits CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Mary Ella Brown Community CenterMaxie L. Parks Community Center District 3 City_Limits Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Mary Ella Brown Community Center N 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Project ID: PC00330Council District: 3 Mary Ella Brown Community CenterVICINITY MAP DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS District 3 City_Limits CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT W Eden AveW Eden Ave W Myers AveW Myers Ave Copyright nearmap 2015 APN-46430025TAPN-46430002TAPN-46430003TAPN-46430004TAPN-46430005T1345 W. Eden Ave Project ID: PC00322 Council District: 3 LOCATION MAPN 0 40 8020 Feet DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS Exhibit ASunset Community Center Legend Park Boundary A St A St Aly Aly Inyo StInyo StM ayor Ave M ayor Ave Mono StMono StAly Aly Aly Aly Aly Aly Copyright nearmap 2015 APN - 46719301T760 Mayor Ave, 760 Mayor Ave A760 Mayor Ave B Project ID: PC00325 Council District: 3 LOCATION MAPN 0 60 12030 Feet DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS Exhibit AFrank H Ball Neighborhood Center Legend Park Boundary AlyAlyS El m A ve S El m A ve E Lorena AveE Lorena AveE California AveE California AveB St B St S Poppy AveS Poppy AveS Geneva AveS Geneva AveCopyright nearmap 2015 APN-47808144T2195 S. Elm Ave Project ID: PC00327 Council District: 3 LOCATION MAPN 0 50 10025 Feet DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS Exhibit AMaxie L. Parks Community Center Legend Maxie L. Parks City acquired parcel to incorporate into community center E Annadale AveE Annadale Ave S Tupman StS Tupman StCopyright nearmap 2015 APN - 32814027T1350 E. Annadale Ave Project ID: PC00330 Council District: 3 LOCATION MAPN 0 90 18045 Feet DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS Exhibit AMary Ella Brown Community Center Legend Park Boundary City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1472 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-F. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Director Capital Projects Department BROCK D. BUCHE, PE, PLS, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:FRANCISCO V. MAGOS II, PE, Assistant Director Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division SAMUEL C. NADORES, Licensed Professional Engineer Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 (Bid File 12400215) (Council District 6): 1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301/Class 1 and 15302/Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2. Award a construction contract to Unified Field Services Corporation of Bakersfield, California, in the amount of $3,533,654 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council (1) adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Sections 15301/Class 1 and 15302/Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for the Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 and (2) award a construction contract to Unified Field Services Corporation, in the amount of $3,533,654; and authorize the Capital Projects Director or designee, to sign and execute all documents on behalf of the City of Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various treatment processes at the NESWTF remove particulate matter from the raw water, which is directed to sludge drying beds. Once particle settling occurs, the upper (clearer) waters are decanted and returned to the head of the NESWTF while the settled particulates are allowed to accumulate further, then are later dried and hauled to an approved landfill. The two northern sludge drying beds (Ponds 1 and 2) at the NESWTF are earthen basins. Awarding a construction contract for this project will line Ponds 1 and 2 with concrete to reduce maintenance issues related to having earthen basins. Funding for this project is included in the Fiscal Year 2024 capital improvement budget within the City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 APPROVED ON CONSENT File #:ID 23-1472 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-F. Water Division DBCP Recovery Fund. BACKGROUND The NESWTF is a proprietary Actiflo surface water treatment facility with a treatment capacity of 30 million gallons per day (MGD),that has been in service since July of 2004.Particulate matter removed via sedimentation and filtration are directed to the sludge drying beds where the residual particles settle and accumulate.As particle settling occurs,the upper (clearer)waters are decanted and returned to the head of the facility for reprocessing.Once accumulated solids reach maximum levels,process waste streams are transferred to another sludge drying bed and the accumulated solids in the original sludge drying bed are allowed to dry and are ultimately removed and taken to an approved landfill. The facility currently maintains four sludge drying beds,two of which,Ponds 1 and 2,are earthen basins.Currently,the earthen basins require additional maintenance related to the pond solids removal process during periods of solids removal.Lining the sludge drying bed with concrete represents a minor alteration that will improve the operation of the facility by ensuring the sludge drying beds maintain the designed slopes and preventing seepage related to earthen lined sludge drying beds. Following preparation of project plans and specifications,a Notice Inviting Bids was published on August 4,2023,and posted on the City’s Planet Bids website.Specifications were distributed to 19 prospective bidders and posted at 8 Building Exchanges.Three sealed bid proposals were received and publicly opened on September 5,2023,of which two were considered responsive and responsible bidders.The bid proposals ranged from $2,486,380 to $3,544,000 with Unified Field Services Corporation identified as the lowest,responsive and responsible bidder,with a submitted bid amount of $3,533,654.The lowest bidder was deemed non-responsive for failing to submit the required documents.The bids will expire 64 days after bid opening,which will be on November 8, 2023. Staff recommends City Council award a construction contract to Unified Field Services Corporation in the amount of $3,533,654 and authorize the Capital Projects Director or designee,to sign and execute all associated documents on behalf of the City. This contract is covered by the Community Workforce Agreement (PLA),as adopted by Council in September 2021.The Contractor shall become signatory to the PLA by executing the Agreement To Be Bound. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff have performed an environmental assessment for the Project and have determined it is consistent with Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1,set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities),which exempts the repair and maintenance of existing facilities that involves negligible or no expansion of an existing use,and Class 2,set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction),which exempts replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the sameCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1472 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-F. will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced.Furthermore,none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set for in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to this Project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because no local business submitted a responsive and responsible bid. The lowest responsive and responsible bidder, United Field Services Corporation affirms to self-perform a minimum of 30 percent of the contract amount with individuals employed within Fresno County. United Field Services Corporation shall also submit a certification that at least 50 percent of the total value of the contract will be performed by either the bidder or subcontractors meeting the local preference criteria. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.Funding for this Project is included in the Fiscal Year 2024 capital improvement budget within the Water Division DBCP Recovery Fund.The Project is located in Council District 6. Attachment(s): Environmental Assessment Bid Evaluation Fiscal Impact Statement Sample Contract Vicinity Map Location Map City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ CITY OF FRESNO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT THE PROJECT DESCRIBED HEREIN IS DETEMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES. CONTACT: Samuel Nadores, Licensed Professional Engineer City of Fresno – Capital Projects Department 1626 E Street Fresno, CA 93706 Phone: 559-621-1602 Email: Samuel.Nadores@Fresno.gov PROJECT TITLE: Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 PROJECT LOCATIONS: Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) 10120 N. Chestnut Ave. Fresno, CA 93730 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project includes stripping and removal of the top 2 inches of surface soil, and other loose sediments from the existing sludge drying beds 1 and 2, placement of aggregate base rock surfacing, including, but not limited to, subgrade preparation, compaction, and the installation of 6 inches thick concrete liner. The Project is exempt under Section 15301/Class 1 and Section 15302/Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Under Section 15301/Class 1, projects are exempt from CEQA requirements when they consist of operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Under Section 15302/Class 2, projects are exempt from CEQA requirements when they consist of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The Project described herein represents the recommended upgrade to existing sludge drying beds 1 and 2 at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF). The specific work tasks are as follows: Stripping and removal of the top 2 inches of surface soil and other loose sediments, placement of aggregate base rock surfacing, including, but not limited to subgrade preparation and compaction. Installation of 6 inches thick concrete liner. As such, the stripping and removal, and installation work are exempt under Section 15301/Class 1 and Section 15302/Class 2. The Project will not expand the use of the existing facility, nor will it relocate any existing facilities or structures. The Project merely represents recommended sludge drying bed improvements by installing concrete liners to reduce maintenance issues related to solids removal, eliminate the necessity for groundwater pumping during facility maintenance periods. None of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2, apply: (a) Location The Project is not located in a sensitive environment or an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern as designated by federal, state, or local agencies. The work is entirely located at the NESWTF. (b) Cumulative Impact The Project will not have a cumulative negative impact over time that is significant. The Project merely entails stripping and removal of loose surface soil and/or concrete lining an existing facility. (c) Significant Effect The Project will not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. All work will be limited to an existing facility at the NESWTF. (d) Scenic Highways The Project will not result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The Project is not located near scenic highways. (e) Hazardous Waste Sites The Project is not located on a hazardous waste site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. (f) Historical Resources The Project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The existing facilities at the NESWTF are not considered historical resources. Furthermore, the proposed project is not expected to have a significant effect on the environment. Accordingly, a categorical exemption, as noted above, has been prepared for the project. Date: September 22, 2023 Prepared by: Samuel Nadores, PE FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROGRAM: Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 WC00021 12400215 TOTAL OR ANNUALIZED RECOMMENDATION CURRENT COST Direct Cost $3,533,654.00 Indirect Cost $ 280,000.00 TOTAL COST $3,813,654.00 Additional Revenue or Savings Generated Net City Cost $3,813,654.00 Amount Budgeted (If none budgeted, identify source) $3,814,100.00 *Indirect Costs Preliminary Engineering $ 165,000.00 Construction Engineering $ 112,000.00 Project Miscellaneous $ 3,000.00 Total Indirect Costs $ 280,000.00 DPW-S Formal Bid Contract – Public Work Improvement (01-2023) Page 1 of 3 CONTRACT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK OF IMPROVEMENT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (City), and [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] (Contractor) as follows: 1. Contract Documents. The “Notice Inviting Bids,” “Instructions to Bidders,” “Bid Proposal,” and the “Specifications” including “General Conditions,” “Special Conditions,” and “Technical Specifications” for the following: [Title] (Bid File No. [Bid File No.]) [Alternates (if any)] copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the drawings, plans, and documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including Performance and Payment Bonds, if required, and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2. Price and Work. For the monetary consideration of [Written Dollar Amount] dollars and [Written Cents Amount] cents ($ [Amount]), as set forth in the Bid Proposal, Contractor promises and agrees to perform or cause to be performed, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the satisfaction of the City’s “Engineer,” and in strict accordance with the Specifications, all of the work as set forth in the Contract Documents. 3. Payment. City accepts Contractor’s Bid Proposal as stated and agrees to pay the consideration stated, at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions specified in the Contract Documents. The Contractor agrees to accept electronic payment from City. 4. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law including California Civil Code Section 2782.8, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including, but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by City, Contractor or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands, and actions in law or equity (including attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and cost to enforce), arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of performance of this Contract. Contractor’s obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers are passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs, or damages caused by the active or sole negligence, or willful misconduct, of City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers. If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. 5. Trench Shoring Detailed Plan. Contractor acknowledges the provisions of DPW-S Formal Bid Contract – Public Work Improvement (01-2023) Page 2 of 3 Section 6705 of the California Labor Code and, if said provisions are applicable to this Contract, agrees to comply therewith. 6. Worker’s Compensation Certification. In compliance with the provisions of Section 1861 of the California Labor Code, Contractor hereby certifies as follows: “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker’s compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this Contract and will make my subcontractors aware of this provision.’ 7. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized and directed to execute and implement this Agreement. The previous sentence is not intended to delegate any authority to the City Manager to administer the Agreement, any delegation of authority must be expressly included in the Agreement. [Signatures follow on the next page.] DPW-S Formal Bid Contract – Public Work Improvement (01-2023) Page 3 of 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract on the day and year here below written, of which the date of execution by City shall be subsequent to that of Contractor’s, and this Contract shall be binding and effective upon execution by both parties. [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] By: Name: (Type or print written signature) Title: (If corporation or LLC., Board Chair, Pres., or Vice Pres.) Dated: By: Name: (Type or print written signature.) Title: (If corporation or LLC., CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) Dated: CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation By: [Name], [Title] [Department] Dated: ATTEST: TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Date Deputy No signature of City Attorney required Standard Document #DPW-S Formal Bid Contract – PWI (01-2023) has been used without modification, as certified by the undersigned. By: [City Certifier Name] [City Certifier Title] Department of Public Works City Address: City of Fresno Attention: [Name], [Title] [Street Address] Fresno, CA [Zip] 180 168 41 99 180 168 41 99 Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfHighlandMcCallShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees McCallHighlandDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanLeonardThompsonFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanThompsonLeonardClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague California State University Fresno Fresno International Airport Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility Council District 6 City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities Vicinity Map 0 21 Miles ¯ Project Location Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities Project Location ¯ Concrete Liner Installation at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) Sludge Drying Beds 1 and 2 Behymer AveChestnut AveNortheast Surface Water Treatment Facility Pond 1 Pond 2 10120 N Chestnut Ave. Fresno CA, 93730 0 200100 Feet CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1518 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-G. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Director Capital Projects Department BROCK D. BUCHE, PE, PLS, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:FRANCISCO V. MAGOS II, PE, Assistant Director Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division ANITA A. LUERA, Supervising Engineering Technician Capital Projects Department, Utilities and On-Site Project Management Division SUBJECT Approve the First Amendment to Service Contract with Partners in Control Inc., dba Enterprise Automation, to increase the value of the Service Contract by $97,754, for a revised fee of $247,673, to complete operational programming at Pump Station 117 (Fresno County island near Council Districts 4 and 6). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the First Amendment to Service Contract (First Amendment) with Partners in Control, Inc., dba Enterprise Automation, to increase the value of the Service Contract by $97,754, for a revised fee of $247,673, to complete operational programming at Pump Station 117 and authorize the Capital Projects Director, or designee, to sign and execute all associated documents on behalf of the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Pump Station 117 has recently been equipped with centralized treatment facilities to remove volatile organic compounds from drinking water to meet water quality standards. The treatment system requires complex operational programming for remote monitoring and control prior to being put into service. Enterprise Automation has started development of the programming, however, the level of effort required to complete the services extends beyond that initially planned when the original Service Contract with Enterprise Automation was prepared. Approval of the First Amendment is required for Enterprise Automation to complete the operational programming and will allow the Department of Public Utilities to put Pump Station 117 into service. Funding for these services is included in the Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Improvement Program budget within the Water Enterprise City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 APPROVED ON CONSENT File #:ID 23-1518 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-G. Fund. BACKGROUND The Department of Public Utilities,Water Division,maintains a network of more than 260 municipal water supply wells,each controlled remotely through the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)system.The SCADA system integrates hardware components with computer software to monitor and control the operational processes at each of the well sites (pump stations).Pump Station 117 has recently been equipped with treatment facilities designed to remove volatile organic compounds from drinking water to meet water quality standards.This series of air stripping facilities and booster pumps will treat water from multiple sources at a centralized location before it is discharged into the water distribution system.The new treatment facilities will require the development of complex programming to integrate the operational processes at Pump Station 117 into the SCADA system, prior to being put into service. The Department of Public Utilities previously conducted a competitive process to select a qualified professional to provide on-call SCADA system integration services and support.On June 15,2023, City Council awarded a Service Contract in the amount of $149,919 to Enterprise Automation for the required services.Enterprise Automation has started development of the complex programming, however,the level of effort required to complete the services extends beyond that initially planned when preparing the original Service Contract.As such,Enterprise Automation requires an additional $97,754 to complete the design,testing,and deployment of the operational programming at Pump Station 117.Staff now recommends Council approve the First Amendment to the Service Contract with Enterprise Automation in the amount of $97,754,increasing the total Service Contract to $247,673,and authorize the Capital Projects Director or designee to execute the First Amendment on behalf of the City of Fresno. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved the First Amendment as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378,the amendment of a Service Contract is not a “Project” for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply to this action because this is an amendment to an existing Service Contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.Funding for these services are included in the Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Improvement Program budget within the Water Enterprise Fund.PS 117 is located within a Fresno County island near Council Districts 4 and 6. Attachment(s): First Amendment to Service Contract City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1518 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-G. Service Contract Vicinity Map Location Map City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ SERVICE CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (City), and PARTNERS IN CONTROL dba ENTERPRISE AUTOMATION, a California Corporation (Contractor) as follows: 1.CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The "Notice Inviting Proposals," "Instructions to Proposers," "Proposal" and the "Specifications" including "General Conditions," "Special Conditions", “Federal Conditions”, “Functional Specifications” and “Technical Requirements” for the following: RFP for DPU/Water Div. On-Call SCADA System Integration Professional Services and Support (Request for Proposals No. 3873) copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including the Performance Bond, if required, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2.PRICE. For the monetary consideration of ONE HUNDRED FORTY NINE THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED NINETEEN DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($149,919.00), as set forth in the Proposal, Contractor promises and agrees to perform or cause to be performed, in a good and workmanlike manner, and to the satisfaction of City, and in strict accordance with the Specifications, all of the work as set forth in the Contract Documents. 3.PAYMENT. City accepts Contractor's Proposal as stated and agrees to pay the consideration stated, at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions specified in the Contract Documents. 4.INDEMNIFICATION. To the furthest extent allowed by law, including California Civil Code section 2782 (if applicable), Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless City and each of its officers, officials, and employees, from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including, but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by City, Contractor or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees and litigation expenses), to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Contractor, its principals, officers, employees, agents or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement. If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify and hold harmless City and each of its officers, officials, and employees in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. [Signatures follow on the next page.] DocuSign Envelope ID: 21680ECB-C573-4D2D-A045-656CFC95A2A2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract on the day and year here below written, of which the date of execution by City shall be subsequent to that of Contractor's, and this Contract shall be binding and effective upon execution by both parties. CITY OF FRESNO, A California municipal corporation By: Melissa Perales, Purchasing Manager General Services Department APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZZ City Attorney By: [Name] Date Senior Deputy City Attorney ATTEST: TODD STERMER City Clerk By: Date Deputy PARTNERS IN CONTROL dba ENTERPRISE AUTOMATION, A California Corporation Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., Board Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres.) By: Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) REVIEWED BY: Addresses: CITY: City of Fresno Attention: James E. Jackson Senior Procurement Specialist 2101 G Street; Bldg. A Fresno, CA 93706 Telephone: (559) 621-1165 E-Mail: james.jackson2@fresno.gov CONTRACTOR: Enterprise Automation Attention: Josh Riley Principal 210 Goddard Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 769-6000 E-Mail: Josh.Riley@eaintegrator.com By: DocuSign Envelope ID: 21680ECB-C573-4D2D-A045-656CFC95A2A2 6/23/2023 Vice President Josh Riley 6/23/2023 Preston Hopson SVP, General Counsel and Sec 6/23/2023 6/26/2023 6/26/2023 6/26/2023 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1539 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-H. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Director Capital Projects Department SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:JESUS AVITIA, PE, Assistant Director Capital Projects Department, Transportation Project Management Division MAGDALENO JIMENEZ, Engineer II Capital Projects Department, Transportation Project Management Division SUBJECT Reject the bid for the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program Phase II Project at Various Locations - Bid File Number 12400024 (Council District 4 and 7) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council reject the bid for the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program Phase II Project at Various Locations and direct staff to rebid the project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff evaluated the bid submission and has concluded that the bid received is 94.5% above the engineer’s estimate of $891,740.00. The higher-than-expected bid price is primarily due to the required bypass pumping requirements specified by the Fresno Irrigation District in order for work to be done within the canal system. Staff has evaluated these requirements and will further discuss options with the Fresno Irrigation District to provide for a more economical solution when the project is rebid. Therefore, staff recommends that City Council reject the current bid and direct staff to rebid the project. BACKGROUND Bridge preventive maintenance is typically applied to bridge elements on structures with significant remaining service life. As a major component of bridge preservation, preventive maintenance is a strategy of extending the service life by applying cost-effective treatments to structurally sound bridges. The concept of preventive bridge maintenance suggests that many relatively small repairs and activities are performed to keep the bridge in good condition, delay future deterioration, and City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 APPROVED ON CONSENT File #:ID 23-1539 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-H. and activities are performed to keep the bridge in good condition,delay future deterioration,and avoid large expenses in major bridge rehabilitation or bridge replacement.The design process commenced in 2018 following the City Council approval of the consultant agreement with Cornerstone Structural Engineering Group Inc., and then completed in July 2023. The Notice to Inviting Bids was published in the Business Journal on July 28,2023,and posted on the City’s website.One bid proposal was received and opened during a public bid opening on September 12,2023,with a bid totaling $1,734,300.00 from American Paving Company,and was deemed a responsive and responsible bidder. Staff evaluated the bid submission for this project and has concluded that the bid received is 94.5% above the engineer’s estimate of $891,740.00.The significant increase in the bid cost can be attributed to the FID Coordination and Bypass Operations requirements within the project specifications.The higher-than-expected bid price is primarily due to the required bypass pumping requirements specified by the Fresno Irrigation District in order for work to be done within the canal system.This specification was included due to the historic wet season experienced earlier this year and the anticipated water retention projected in the canal from snowpack melt runoff following the Fresno Irrigation District (FID)water delivery season,which spans from November 01,2023,to February 15,2024.Minimum flow rates,as well as varying flow rate scenarios for the First Street Bridge (Br.No.42C0198)and Maple Avenue Bridge (Br.No.42C0217)locations were provided by FID and included into the project specifications that the contractors needed to consider in their bid cost.Due to the uncertainty of the canal's water flow during the project window and the varying flow rate scenarios,accurately estimating a cost for the bypass work presented a significant challenge to the contractor during the bid phase process.Staff has evaluated these requirements and will further discuss options with the Fresno Irrigation District to provide for a more economical solution when the project is rebid. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved this item. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,Section 15378, the rejection of the bid does not qualify as a “project” as defined by the CEQA requirements. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local Preference was not implemented because this action is to reject the bid. FISCAL IMPACT A rejection of the bid for the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program Phase II Project at Various Locations,which is located in Council District 4 and 7,will result in additional staff costs to rebid the project.The adopted project budget has sufficient funding to cover the additional staff costs in order to rebid the project.There will be no impact to the General Fund.The project is grant funded by the Highway Bridge Program (HBP).Required local match is funded by SB1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) funds. City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1539 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-H. Attachment(s): Bid Evaluation Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 10/13/23 e Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague N 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Project ID: PW00771Council District: 4 & 7 BRIDGE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM PHASE II AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS VICINITY MAP DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS District 4 District 7 City Limits PROJECT LOCATIONS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1559 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-I. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:BROCK D. BUCHE, PE, PLS, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:RICK STAGGS, Assistant Director Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division CORY ASHER, Wastewater Manager - Certified Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division SUBJECT Approve a first amendment to a service contract with Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., to increase the contract not-to-exceed amount for Biosolids reuse and disposal services in the amount of $2,826,866.69, for a total contract value of $9,198,866.69 (Bid File No. 9468) (Citywide) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve a first amendment to a service contract with Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., to provide for Biosolids reuse and disposal services in the amount of $2,826,866.69, for a total contract value of $9,198,866.69; and authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to sign the amendment on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City of Fresno’s Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF) generates Biosolids as a byproduct of wastewater treatment. The proposed first amendment would allow for Biosolids management to continue to be performed by Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC. The Fresno Biosolids project involves transporting Biosolids by Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., to be used for mine reclamation and soil amendment. On January 17, 2019, the Council authorized a service contract with Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., for Biosolids reuse and disposal services. Currently, the Department of Public Utilities Wastewater Management Division seeks approval of a first amendment to the service contract that would increase the contract’s not-to-exceed amount from $6,372,000.00 to $9,198,866.69. Biosolids disposal is a critical step in the wastewater treatment process. BACKGROUND The City of Fresno’s RWRF is a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week operation, reclaiming wastewater for beneficial use for the City and the surrounding areas. The RWRF currently accepts and processes approximately 58 million gallons of wastewater daily. During the treatment process, the RWRF City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MA/GB 6-0 TM ABSENT File #:ID 23-1559 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-I. approximately 58 million gallons of wastewater daily.During the treatment process,the RWRF generates approximately 325 tons of Biosolids daily as a byproduct.These Biosolids are managed by two contracted haulers: Synagro Technologies, Inc., and Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC. The Department of Public Utilities Wastewater Management Division has existing service contracts with both haulers mentioned.However,the initially allocated not-to-exceed amount for Holloway Environmental Solutions,LLC.,has been fully utilized.Consequently,the Division is seeking the Council’s approval for an additional funding allocation of $2,826,866.69.This adjustment will elevate the total contract value to $9,198,866.69,ensuring the availability of adequate funds for the uninterrupted management of Biosolids up to the contract’s expiration. City Attorney has reviewed and approved the first amendment as to form.Upon approval of the City Council the first amendment will be executed by the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,on behalf of the City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a “Project”for the purposes of CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 1578(b)(5),as it is an administrative action that will not result in direct or indirect changes to the environment. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply to this action because this is an amendment to an existing Service Contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.The project has citywide benefit.Appropriations for this project are included in the Fiscal Year 2024 Wastewater Management Division’s Operating Budget, and future purchases will be included in future fiscal year budgets. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., Amendment 1 Attachment 2 - Holloway Environmental Solutions, LLC., Service Contract City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Amendment) made and entered into as of this ____ day of November 2023, (Effective Date) amends the Agreement heretofore entered into between the CITY OF FRESNO, a municipal corporation (City), and Holloway Environmental Solutions LLC, a Wyoming Limited Liability Corporation (Contractor). RECITALS WHEREAS, The City and Contractor entered into a Service Agreement on January 17, 2019, (Agreement) to provide for Biosolids reuse and disposal services for $1,274,400.00 per year for three years with two one-year optional terms; and WHEREAS, the City and Contractor desire to increase the contract price to not to exceed $2,826,866.69, for a total contract value of $9,198,866.69; and WHEREAS, with entry into this Amendment, Contractor agrees that it has no claim, demands, or disputes against the City. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Contractor agree that the aforesaid Agreement be amended as follows: 1.The contract price shall be increased by $2,826,866.69, for a total contract value of $9,198,866.69. 2.In the event of any conflict between the body of this Amendment and any exhibit or attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Amendment shall control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the exhibit or attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any exhibit or attachment hereto which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the parties, provided for within the body of this Amendment, shall be null and void. 3.Except as otherwise provided herein, the Agreement dated January 17, 2019, will remain in full force and effect. [Signatures follow on the next page.] DocuSign Envelope ID: 283374FA-2897-4739-893D-D20F334B6E10 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at Fresno, California, on the day and year first above written. CITY OF FRESNO, A California municipal corporation By: Brock D. Buche, PE, PLS, Director Department of Public Utilities APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZ City Attorney By: Angela M. Karst Date Senior Deputy City Attorney Date Holloway Environmental Solutions LLC, A Wyoming Limited Liability Corporation By: Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., Board Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres.) By: Name: Title: (If corporation or LLC., CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) ATTEST: TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy Addresses: CITY: City of Fresno Attention: Cory Asher 5607 W Jensen Avenue Fresno, CA 93706 Telephone No. 559-621-5170 CONSULTANT: Holloway Environmental Solutions LLC, Attention: Dan Allen 2019 Westwind Drive Suite B Bakersfield, CA 93301 Telephone No. 661-332-5034 DocuSign Envelope ID: 283374FA-2897-4739-893D-D20F334B6E10 Brian Maxted 10/10/2023 CEO COO Dan Allen 10/10/2023 10/10/2023 Clerk Attesting SERVICE CONTRACT fi•/::'_ !1� 1 '1-Iii�·, I/., I/! 1 THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Holloway Environmental Solutions LLC, a Wyoming Limited Liability Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Contractor") as follows: 1. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The "Notice Inviting Proposals," "Instructions to Proposers," "Proposal" and the "Specifications" including "General Conditions," "Special Conditions", "Federal Conditions", "Functional Specifications" and "Technical Requirements" for the following: Requirements Contract for the Removal, Processing, and Beneficial Reuse of Biosolids (Request for Proposals No. 9468) copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including the Performance Bond, if required, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2.PRICE. For the monetary consideration of ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($1,274,400.00), as set forth in the Proposal, Contractor promises and agrees to perform or cause to be performed, in a good and workmanlike manner, and to the satisfaction of City, and in strict accordance with the Specifications, all of the work as set forth in the Contract Documents. 3.PAYMENT. City accepts Contractor's Proposal as stated and agrees to pay the consideration stated, at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor agrees to accept electronic payment from City. 4.INDEMNIFICATION: Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by City, Contractor or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including attorney's fees and litigation expenses), arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of performance of this Contract. Contractor's obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers are actively or passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages caused solely by the gross negligence, or caused by the willful misconduct, of the City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. I/Ill Ill/I RFP 3-14 06/25/13CAOApprovedJR City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1543 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-J. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:JILL M. GORMLEY, TE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Traffic & Engineering Services Division AIMEE SCRIVNER, Supervising Engineering Technician Public Works Department, Traffic Operations and Planning SUBJECT BILL - (For introduction) Amending the uncodified ordinance to adopt changes and additions to the official list of designated special speed zones for various streets within the City of Fresno pursuant to Section 14-1501 of the Fresno Municipal Code (Citywide). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the attached Special Speed Zone Ordinance be introduced at this time, prior to the final adoption at the next scheduled meeting of the City Council. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to introduce an amended Ordinance to update the official list of designated special speed zones pursuant to Section 14-1501 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). The update is to reflect speed changes and additions which have been made due to development, increased traffic volumes, annexations, locations left off of previous ordinance and construction of new streets and various locations in the City of Fresno. Engineering and traffic surveys have been completed for each speed zone listed, in order to determine speed limits which are “reasonable and safe” as defined in accordance with the requirements of the California Vehicle Code (CVC). BACKGROUND The CVC authorizes local authorities to determine and regulate speed limits on streets under local jurisdiction, subject to certain requirements. Pursuant to CVC Sections 22357 and 22358, speed limits may be adopted in five (5) miles per hour (mph) increments ranging from 25 mph to 65 mph and must be justified based on engineering and traffic surveys. At the local level, FMC Section 14- 1501 provides for an Official List of Special Speed Zones to be kept in the form of an uncodified ordinance. For this reason, it is not necessary to amend the FMC itself each time speed zones are changed or added. City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MA/MK 6-0 TM ABSENT B-34 File #:ID 23-1543 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-J. Assembly Bill (AB)43 was signed by Governor Newsom in 2021 and amended CVC Section 22358 allowing the consideration of additional provisions to set speed limits on local roadways.In addition to the completion of an engineering and traffic survey,Section 22358.7 was added allowing for reductions of a posted speed limits along a portion of roadway on a designated safety corridor or adjacent to any land or facility that generates high concentrations of bicyclists or pedestrians.Per Section 22358.7,the local authority may not use these additional provisions until June 30,2024 or until the Judicial Council has developed an online tool for adjudicating infraction violations statewide as specified in Article 7 (commencing with Section 68645)of Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code,whichever is sooner.Staff anticipates utilizing these provisions for speed limit reductions in the 2024 Special Speed Zone Ordinance. A comprehensive speed zone ordinance was adopted by Council on February 1,1965,and minor updates were made on July 26,2005,August 29,2006,September 18,2007,July 22,2008, September 30,2010,September 22,2011,March 7,2013,August 28,2014,August 21,2016, September 28,2017,September 27,2018,September 26,2019,October 15,2020,and October 14, 2021,November 3,2022.This amendment (or regular update)is relatively minor in scope.The updated list includes posting one (1)previously “unposted”and/or newly constructed segments of roadway,lowering the speed limit on sixteen (16)segments of roadway and listing two (2)segments omitted from previous Speed Ordinances.Engineering and traffic surveys in compliance with CVC requirements were completed for each zone listed. The chart below summarizes the proposed speed limit changes and additions: STREET FROM TO PREVIOUS RECOMMENDED GLENN AUDUBON DEL MAR 30 MPH 25 MPH CORNELIA SANTA ANA SHAW 25 MPH1 25 MPH SAN JOSE CORNELIA SALINAS ***35 MPH G ST EL DORADO DIVISADERO 40 MPH 35 MPH MINNEWAWA JENSEN GROVE 40 MPH 35 MPH HUGHES SHIELDS ASHLAN 40 MPH 35 MPH HAYES HERNDON VETERANS 40 MPH1 40 MPH CLINTON VAN NESS BLACKSTONE 40 MPH 35 MPH CLINTON WAY WINERY MCKINLEY 40 MPH 35 MPH PARKWAY DAKOTA ASHLAN 45 MPH 40 MPH SHAW CHESTNUT MAPLE 45 MPH 40 MPH FRESNO SIERRA HERNDON 45 MPH 40 MPH FRESNO HERNDON ALLUVIAL 45 MPH 40 MPH FRESNO ALLUVIAL NEES 45 MPH 40 MPH FRESNO NEES FRIANT 45 MPH 40 MPH FRIANT FRESNO AUDUBON 45 MPH 40 MPH GOLDEN STATE BELMONT OLIVE 50 MPH 45 MPH GOLDEN STATE OLIVE MCKINLEY 50 MPH 45 MPH FRIANT AUDUBON SHEPHERD 50 MPH 45 MPH MPH = Miles per hour 1 = Not included in previous updates *** = newly constructed roadway segments City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1543 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:1.-J. STREET FROM TO PREVIOUS RECOMMENDEDGLENNAUDUBONDEL MAR 30 MPH 25 MPHCORNELIASANTA ANA SHAW 25 MPH1 25 MPHSAN JOSE CORNELIA SALINAS ***35 MPHG ST EL DORADO DIVISADERO 40 MPH 35 MPHMINNEWAWAJENSENGROVE40 MPH 35 MPHHUGHESSHIELDSASHLAN40 MPH 35 MPHHAYESHERNDONVETERANS40 MPH1 40 MPHCLINTONVAN NESS BLACKSTONE 40 MPH 35 MPHCLINTON WAY WINERY MCKINLEY 40 MPH 35 MPHPARKWAYDAKOTAASHLAN45 MPH 40 MPHSHAWCHESTNUTMAPLE45 MPH 40 MPHFRESNOSIERRAHERNDON45 MPH 40 MPHFRESNOHERNDONALLUVIAL45 MPH 40 MPHFRESNOALLUVIALNEES45 MPH 40 MPHFRESNONEESFRIANT45 MPH 40 MPH FRIANT FRESNO AUDUBON 45 MPH 40 MPH GOLDEN STATE BELMONT OLIVE 50 MPH 45 MPH GOLDEN STATE OLIVE MCKINLEY 50 MPH 45 MPH FRIANT AUDUBON SHEPHERD 50 MPH 45 MPH MPH = Miles per hour 1 = Not included in previous updates *** = newly constructed roadway segments ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a “project”for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378,as updating the Speed Zone Ordinance will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because updating the Special Speed Zone Ordinance does not include a bid or an award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impact will occur as a result of updating the Special Speed Zone Ordinance.Maintenance and replacement of traffic signs is a regular budgeted expense which will not change as a result of this update. Attachment(s): Amended Ordinance Proposed Speed Limit Changes & Additions - 2023 City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Page 14 of 16 BELMONT BELMONT BULLARD CEDAR CENTRAL CLOVIS CLOVIS COPPER DAKOTA FRIANT GOLDEN STATE GOLDEN STATE GRANTLAND HERNDON HERNDON JENSEN JENSEN BYPASS KEARNEY KINGS CANYON MARKS MCKINLEY MCKINLEY MARKS NORTH NORTH SHAW TEMPERANCE TEMPERANCE WALNUT WILLOW ARMSTRONG TO TEMPERANCE MARKS TO VALENTINE CEDAR TO WILLOW MALAGA TO MUSCAT CEDAR TO EAST GROVE TO CALIFORNIA OLIVE TO DAKOTA FRIANT TO WILLOW FINE TO PEACH SHEPHERD TO COPPER MCKINLEY TO CLINTON MAPLE TO CALIFORNIA SHIELDS TO ASHLAN RIVERSIDE TO BLACKSTONE FRESNO TO WILLOW JENSEN BYPASS TO CHESTNUT GOLDEN STATE TO JENSEN HUGHES TO MARKS ARGYLE TO APRICOT JENSEN TO KEARNEY BRAWLEY TO GRANTLAND PEACH TO CLOVIS JENSEN TO CALIFORNIA WEST TO HUGHES FRUIT TO WALNUT HAYES TO GRANTLAND SHIELDS TO DAKOTA CHURCH TO CALIFORNIA ANNADALE TO NORTH SR 168 TO COPPER SECTION 7. Under provisions of Section 14-1501 of the Fresno Municipal Code of the City of Fresno, the prima-facie speed limit for the street, or portions thereof, designated in this subsection is hereby determined and declared to be fifty-five miles per hour. STREET NAME SEGMENT CALIFORNIA HUGHES TO MARKS CORNELIA NORTH TO MUSCAT FRIANT COPPER TO COPPER RIVER JENSEN CHESTNUT TO CLOVIS JENSEN FRUIT TO WEST KINGS CANYON APRICOT TO TEMPERANCE WEST JENSEN TO NORTH L:\MapProjects\Speed Limit Map\Speed Ordinance Update Map 2023.mxd 0 1 2 30.5 Miles City of FresnoDepartment of Public WorksSpeed Limit Update MapProposed Speed LimitChanges & Additions - 2023 8 This map is believed to be an accuraterepresentation of the City of FresnoGIS data. However, we make nowarranties either expressed or impliedfor the correctness of this data. Legend Posted Speed Limit 2023 Symbol and Speed 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Council Districts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1545 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-K. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, M.A., Interim Director Department of Transportation THROUGH:CAROLINA ILIC, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Department of Transportation BY: DREW WILSON, Planning Manager Department of Transportation SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION- Authorizing the submission of grant applications to California Air Resource Board (CARB) Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP) Grant Program for Environmental Justice and Transportation Equity in West Fresno Projects totaling up to $12 million in requests of grant application funding and authorizing the execution of grant application and accepting the grant and completing grant agreement documents by the Department of Transportation Director or Designee(s). (Subject to Mayor’s Veto). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of grant applications to the California Air Resource Board (CARB) Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP) Grant Program for Environmental Justice and Transportation Equity in West Fresno Projects, totaling up to $12 million in requests of grant application funding; and authorize the execution of all grant applications and grant agreement documents by the Department of Transportation Director or designee(s). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The CARB STEP Grant Program aims to increase transportation equity in disadvantaged and low- income communities by funding clean transportation solutions. The STEP Grant application proposed the Department of Transportation / Fresno Area Express (FAX) will seek funding to advance transportation equity in West Fresno through the creation of a zero-emission microtransit service, and several Active Transportation Projects such as sidewalk rehabilitation, placement of bike racks, and installation of HAWK Pedestrian Crossings. BACKGROUND City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 R. 2023-289 APPROVED ON CONSENT File #:ID 23-1545 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-K. The STEP Grant’s overarching goal is to increase transportation equity in disadvantaged and low- income communities by 1)addressing community residents'transportation needs,2)increasing access to key destinations and services,and 3)reducing GHG emissions and vehicle miles traveled. Increasing transportation equity will create equitable access to social and economic opportunities for traditionally underserved communities.Attaining transportation equity requires considering all components of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,environmental justice principles,and nondiscriminatory practices.STEP grants provide funding for a combination of different types of clean transportation and supporting projects within a single community. The STEP grant intends to facilitate collaboration between community residents,local public agencies,and private partners by funding different types of clean transportation and supporting projects within a single community.The collaboration allows for the creation of a cleaner,more accessible,and integrated transportation system that benefits the community residents who need it most.STEP is particularly focused on supporting projects that have the potential to reduce passenger vehicle miles traveled and that prioritize long-term mode shift toward sustainable mobility and reductions in vehicle miles traveled.STEP focuses on projects that support sustainable communities,attempting to address some of the complex transportation and land use challenges identified in the Senate Bill 150 Progress Report.STEP incorporates key recommendations from CARB’s Senate Bill 350 Guidance Document,providing the flexibility to fund many different types of clean transportation and supporting projects in a single community to help meet unique needs within that community's context. FAX’s STEP Grant application will seek funding to advance transportation equity in West Fresno, particularly for low-income and minority communities,including those in the Three Palms Mobile Home Park and transitional housing locations generally bounded by SR-99,Grantland,Shaw,and Clinton.These areas currently face limited transit access and significant challenges in reaching essential services safely.Working closely with community partners,including Highway City Community Development,Centro La Familia,the Jakara Movement,and others,and drawing on data from existing plans, the grant proposes two key initiatives: 1.A three-year zero-emission pilot microtransit service,operating approximately five fully-electric vehicles six days a week for approximately 12 hours per day, and; 2.Active transportation projects such as sidewalk rehabilitation,placement of bike racks,and installation of HAWK Pedestrian Crossings. The grant applications are due on November 3,2023.The City Attorney’s office has reviewed and approved the staff report and resolution as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378,this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not included because this resolution does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1545 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-K. FISCAL IMPACT This resolution will have no impact on the General Fund. The grant does not require matching funds. Attachments: Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1586 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-L. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MIKE KARBASSI, Councilmember District 2 SUBJECT Approve the reappointment of Dr. Carole Goldsmith to the Regional Workforce Development Board for a term ending November 1, 2025. Attachment: Goldsmith Appointment Packet City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 APPROVED ON CONSENT FRESNO REGIONAL WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD APPLICATION FOR RE-APPOINTMENT I.Applicant Information Date:_�11_6_{ �--=--t/_· 1:�J�------ Name: Co'fD\t, (-;iJJ71v-ili0 Home Address: City/State/Zip: -�_e_s_·�_D-+-l _C�f\--______ _ Phone County Supervisorial District Number for Residential Address. (Please check one box) {Please see http: //www2.co.fresno.ca.us/2850/XMLLookup/IE6/Index.asp }- District 1 (Pacheco) District 2 (Brandau) District 3 (Quintero) District 4 (Mendes) District 5 (Magsig) City Council District Number for Residential Address. (Please check one box) {Please see http://www.fresno.gov/Government/CitvCouncil/CouncilLocator.htm }- □ / District 1 (Perea) l5J' District 2 (Karbassi) □District 3 (Arias)□District 4 (Maxwell)□District 5 (Chavez)□District 6 (Bredefeld)□District 7 (Esparza) Business/Organization Name: �...\;j__ Co \I\ tt,..._ �A,.JA 0'-( Co� \q<-D<S!/ l<.- r - ,/') \1 , Your Title: L\,f\.V,Jl\c.e\\,�V Business Address: City/State/Zip: W-tSV\O CA Phone: Page 1 of 7 2 President, West Hills College Coalinga, January 2013 – August 2016 Duties Served as CEO of the college. Responsible to the Governing Board and Chancellor for the supervision and evaluation of the administrative staff and educational programs and services of the college. Delegated authority, with support, to managers supervising other administrative, teaching, and classified staff. Served, as necessary, on all negotiation committees with academic and classified staff. Represented the District at the state and local level on behalf of the Chancellor. Accomplishments • Provided leadership for the passage of the District’s Measure T in 2014 for $20 Million for Ed-Tech • Collaborated with Lynda Resnick and leaders in her holding company, The Wonderful Company, to advocate for statewide change in educational policy, leading to expanded access to college education statewide for high school students • Lead the $20 Million Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) Grant project for the valley colleges and served as an advocate for the region • Formulated and recommended to the Chancellor and Board of Trustees policies and procedures that supported faculty in the expansion of Open Educational Resource adoption • Collaborated with faculty in the development, modification, and expansion of college opportunities that improved student success and expanded high school dual enrollment • Secured fiscal and in-kind donations to the college through donor development to support athletics and the Farm of the Future Vice Chancellor of Educational Services and Workforce Development, West Hills Community College District, October 2009 - December 2012 Duties Responsible for multiple district functions, including the assessment, planning, and evaluation of the district’s resources, programs, and services. Supervised a team of district-level administrators in such areas as Grants, Workforce Development, Child Development, Distance Education, and Westside Institute of Technology to ensure implementation of district-wide goals, statutes, and policies. Assisted in the planning, development, and implementation of Board policies, operational procedures, and strategies for achieving District goals and objectives. Served as the district liaison to workforce investment boards, K-16, and state and local agencies, including the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. Accomplishments • Provided leadership and support for the passage of the District’s bond measure that led to the new Firebaugh campus • Lead the strategic planning process and implementation of Board policies, operational procedures, and strategies for achieving District goals and objectives • Partnered with local elected officials to create the Power Pathways program, which created redevelopment opportunities for the cities and paid internship experiences for students • Collaborated with faculty and counselors to revamped CTE Programs to include embedded tutoring • Provided leadership in the development of the District Technology Plan • Worked with philanthropic foundations to support faculty in the adoption of Open Resources • Developed contract education that led to salary advancement of rural agriculture workers 3 OTHER EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE Director of Regional Strategic Development and Workforce Development, West Hills Community College District, November 2003 – September 2009 • Lead strategic regional planning in collaboration with K-12 educational partners, Workforce Investment Boards, college faculty, and area employers • Analyzed data to project long-range program and resource needs • Oversaw data collection for state and federal reports • Analyzed factors and services that influence student recruitment and retention • Developed and managed West Side Institute of Technology Vice Principal III, César Chávez Adult Education Center, Fresno Unified School District, 1999 – Oct 2003 • Evaluated and supervised over 45 faculty members • Managed Information Technology Unit • Awarded California Department of Education’s Program of Excellence Director of Faculty Training, San Joaquin Valley College, June 1998 – February 1999 • Created and implemented faculty training to integrate instruction and technology • Expanded student tutorial programs • Served on Cultural Diversity Committee ACCREDITATION EXPERIENCE • Team Leader, San Bernardino Valley College, Comprehensive Evaluation, 2020 • Chair, Solano Community College, Comprehensive Evaluation, 2017 • Chair, Folsom Lake College, Comprehensive Evaluation, 2015 • Member, West Los Angeles College, Comprehensive Evaluation, 2012 • Member, Sacramento City College, Comprehensive Evaluation, 2009 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: TEACHING Visiting Lecturer, California University, Fresno, 2017-2019 Taught courses in educational foundations leadership in doctoral program Adjunct Faculty, National University, 2006-2010 Taught courses in educational foundations K12 History/Language Arts Teacher, Washington Colony, 1996-1998 Taught U.S. History Language Arts Teacher, Upward Bound Program, California University, Fresno, 1995-1996 Taught Language Arts Teacher ACHIEVEMENTS: RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDRAISING (abbreviated list) • 200 iPads donated from a local philanthropic individual, 2020 • $10 Million Fresno Regional K16 Collaborative, 2019 • $16.9 Million Transformational Climate Change, 2018 • $2M total from California Assemblymember Dr. Joaquin Arambula, 2018 and 2019 • 7.5 Acres donated for West Fresno Campus by Mr. Terrance Frazier, 2018 • 20 Acres donated for West Fresno Campus by Shehadey Family, 2018 • $250K donated from Chevron - 2017-2021 • $144K raised during Giving Tuesdays and increased employee donor base 2017-2020 • $2.5 M Innovation Award in Higher Education, California Governor’s Office, April 2015 • $20M Department of Labor TAACCCT Grant, 2011-14 • $5M California Education Policy Fund Grant, 2012/11 4 PUBLICATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, AFFILIATIONS & HONORS (abbreviated list, complete list available upon request) Publications • “Fresno City College Leader Speaks Out for Civil Rights, Educational Opportunities” Fresno Bee, July 24, 2020 • “Ensuring a viable Valley means letting high school students take college courses” Fresno Bee, March 2019 • “Parking lots aren’t ‘paved paradise’ for homeless students. State bill offers wrong solution.” Fresno Bee, July 14, 2019 • “Poverty engulfs the San Joaquin Valley. Education is the way to remove that dark cloud.” (Editorial Board with Dr. Joseph Castro and Dr. Carole Goldsmith). Fresno Bee, September 19, 2019 • “Stranded by ITT Tech? Community Colleges can help.” Fresno Bee, September 13, 2016 • “Rural Collaboration Works to Build Higher Skills in Hopes of Attracting Better Job” Co-authored, Rural Connections, 2009 • “California Adult Workplace Education: A Guide for Vocational English Second Language and Vocational Adult Basic Education Program” Co-authored, OTAN Publication 2003 VISIBLE LEADERSHIP: COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT National-Level • Educational Advisory Board, Presidential Research Advisory Council Invited Member 2021-present State-Level • California Community College Chancellor’s Office Police Reform Taskforce, Member 2021-present • California Community College Chancellor’s Office Advisory Committee on Economic & Workforce Development – EDPAC, Member 2014-present • Community College League of California, Advisory Committee on Education Services o Co-chair, 2019- Present o Member, 2017-2019 • California Board of Governors, Task Force on Workforce, Job Creation and a Strong Economy, Member, 2014-2015 • California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, 2011 – present o Board Member 2011-present o Appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger, December 2010 o Re-appointed by Governor Brown, July 2012 • California Community College Association of Occupational Education o Vice President 2014-2017 o Board Member 2009-2014 • California Department of Education, Field Advisory Committee, Team Member, Vocational English as a Second Language, June 2003 Local-Level • Fresno K-16 Collaborative, Chair 2018 - present • Central Valley Higher Education Consortium (CVHEC) Board Member 2013-present • Westside Institute of Technology, Board Member 2005-2016 • RJI Workforce Development Taskforce, Co-Chair 2005-2010 • San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization 2007-2017 o Board Chair 2009-2017 5 Central Valley Radio Appearances • 940 ESPN Radio with Christopher Gabriel, July 2, 2020 • “Ray Appleton Show” KMJ, May 2, 2019 • “Valley Public Radio with Jeffery Hess”, KVPR, October 27, 2017 Invited Presentations • Jobs for the Future, Horizons 2021 Conference, “Investing in Talent through Inclusive Economic Development”, June 15, 2021 • Governor’s Office, DRIVE Initiative, January 2019 • California Assembly Higher Education Committee, Funding for Police and Fire Programs, April 2019 • Governor’s Office, Innovation Award, April 2015 • California Board of Governors, “Hispanic Serving Institutions Workforce Strategy” September 2013 • U.S. Department of Labor, “WHCCD Pathways Out of Poverty: Lessons learned” February 2012 Conference Presentations • “Building a Symbiotic Relationship between the Board and CEO: Successful Evaluation Ideas.” Moderator. Community College League of California, May 6, 2021 • “COVID-19 One Year Later: Policy Concerns and Possible Legal Ramifications” Facilitator. Annual Trustee Conference. Community College League of California, May 7, 2021 • “Delivering Onsite Instruction During a Pandemic” Panelist. General Session presented at Effective Trusteeship & Board Chair Workshop. Community College League of California, January 22, 2021 • “California Priorities” Panelist. Fresno Bee’s California Priorities: Focus on Education summit held at Fresno State’s Satellite Student Union Wednesday, September 2019 • “CEO Leadership Academy” Presenter. The Community College League of California, June 2018. • “Improving Your Scorecard through CTE Program Success: New CTE Program Review Tool” Presenter. Community College League of California Convention, November 2015 • “Strategic Advice on Developing Partnerships” Complete College America. April 2012 Professional Development Honors • Participant by Invitation, Aspen institute, Resnick Action Forum: Leading Toward Justice, 2016 • Participant by Invitation, American Association of Community Colleges, Presidents Academy, 2014 • Participant by Invitation, Chris McCarthy Vineyard CEO Symposium, 2015 Professional Affiliations and Societies • ACCCA, Association of California Community College Administrators • League of California Community College Chief Executive Offices • NILD, National Institute for Leadership Development Honors • Diversity Champion Award, California Law Pathway, February 2021 • Woman of the Year, Senator Andreas Borgeas, March 2020 • Dr. Harold Haak Award, Fresno Educational Compact, March 2019 • Community Leadership Award, League of Women Voters, August 2019 • Top Ten Professional Women, Marjaree Mason Center, August 2018 • Faculty Honor Initiate for Academic Excellence, Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society, 2018 • Champion for Education and Families, Central California Legal Services, October 2018 • Distinguished Alumni, National University, 2017 • Friend of Manufacturing, San Joaquin Valley Manufacturing Alliance, April 2017 • LEAD Award, Fresno’s Leading Young Professionals, 2017 • Top Dog Alumni Award, 2013 Fresno State Alumni Association, • Working for California Recognition, California State University Alumni Association, 2012 • Champion of Job Creation, California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, Central California Community Colleges Committee to Change Consortium, 2012 6 • Marianne Loniello Lifetime Achievement Award, Association of Community and Continuing Education, March 2008 • Friend of Nursing Award, Central Valley Coalition of Nursing Organizations, May 2008 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1588 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-M. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MIGUEL A. ARIAS, Councilmember District 3 SUBJECT Resolution renaming the Roeding Dog Park Run to “Puppy Love” Dog Park Attachment: Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 R. 2023-290 APPROVED ON CONSENT 1 of 2 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ______ Resolution No. ____________ RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, RENAMING THE ROEDING DOG PARK RUN TO “PUPPY LOVE” DOG PARK WHEREAS, the City of Fresno owns the regional park located at 890 West Belmont Avenue, commonly known as Roeding Park; and WHEREAS, there is currently a dog park located inside Roeding Park, which contains a dog run (Dog Park); and WHEREAS, the Dog Park, which is a neighborhood hub, particularly for those residents located in District 3, bringing together both pets and their owners; and WHEREAS, pet owners who gather at the Dog Park have advocated for better conditions and amenities at the facility; and WHEREAS, the Dog Park has undergone recent renovations and upgrades; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Section 5-101 the Council has the ability to name or rename public facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. The Dog Park currently known as Roeding Dog Park Run shall hereafter be named “Puppy Love” Dog Park. 2. This Resolution is adopted in accordance with Section 8 of Administrative Order 6-2. 3. The provisions of Resolution No. 2020-272 shall be waived with respect to this Resolution. 2 of 2 4. This resolution shall be effective upon final approval. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, TODD STERMER, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2023. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZ City Attorney By: Angela M. Karst Date Senior Deputy City Attorney City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department BY:SARAH GAYTAN, Program Manager Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant guidelines. RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting the Fresno City Council approve the grant guidelines established by the Fresno Arts Council in partnership with Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission). This request is in accordance with the Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) between the Fresno Arts Council and the City of Fresno, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax (Measure P) allocates 12% of funds collected for competitive grants aiding nonprofit organizations to expand access to arts and culture. The grant guidelines prepared by the Commission and Fresno Arts Council are now presented to City Council for consideration and adoption. BACKGROUND In 2018, a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. In accordance with the Agreement dated August 10, 2023, Fresno Arts Council developed written grant guidelines to make grant awards. The Agreement requires the grant guidelines to be consistent with the priorities, recommendations, and strategies identified in the City adopted Cultural Arts Plan and the requirements outlined in the Measure P Ordinance. Grant guidelines shall include all information necessary to ensure a transparent process, including, but not limited to scoring criteria, City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1554 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-B. eligible scoring committee members, process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, priority funding categories, expenditure delivery deadlines, and risk assessments. Grants funded shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council or its successor local arts agency. The Commission provided input on the grant guidelines prepared by the Fresno Arts Council and recommended the guidelines for adoption at their October 16, 2023, Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A- Does not apply to this action. FISCAL IMPACT Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 in Article 15 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants. Funding for the grant program and grant program administration is reflected in the FY 2024 PARCS budget and fully encumbered to the Fresno Arts Council consistent with the Agreement. Attachments: Resolution Project Specific Grant Guidelines General Operating Support Grant Guidelines City of Fresno Printed on 10/31/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: AARON A. AGUIRRE, Director Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department BY: SARAH GAYTAN, Program Manager Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department SUBJECT ..Title ***RESOLUTION – Adopting the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Guidelines ..Body RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Fresno City Council approve the grant guidelines established by the Fresno Arts Council in partnership with Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission (Commission). This recommendation is in accordance with the Administrative Services Agreement (Agreement) between the Fresno Arts Council and the City of Fresno, to provide grant management and administration of the Measure P Expanded Access to Arts and Culture Grant Program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresno Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Transaction and Use Tax (Measure P) allocates 12% of funds collected for competitive grants aiding nonprofit organizations to expand access to arts and culture. The grant guidelines prepared by the Commission and Fresno Arts Council are now presented to City Council for consideration and adoption. BACKGROUND In 2018, a majority of Fresno voters approved Measure P, which was thereafter codified in Chapter 7, Article 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC). Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants for nonprofit organizations that support and expand access to arts and cultural programming. In accordance with the Agreement dated August 10, 2023, Fresno Arts Council developed written grant guidelines to make grant awards. The Agreement requires the grant guidelines to be consistent with the priorities, recommendations, and strategies identified in the City adopted Cultural Arts Plan and the requirements outlined in the Measure P Ordinance. Grant guidelines shall include all information necessary to ensure a transparent process, including, but not limited to scoring criteria, eligible scoring committee members, process for public disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, priority funding categories, expenditure delivery deadlines, and risk assessments. Grants funded shall be implemented by the Commission in partnership with the Fresno Arts Council or its successor local arts agency. The Commission provided input on the grant guidelines prepared by the Fresno Arts Council [and recommended the guidelines for adoption at their October 16, 2023, Commission meeting]. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A- Does not apply to this action. FISCAL IMPACT Twelve percent (12%) of the funds made available from Section 7-1504 in Article 15 shall be made available on an annual basis to invest in competitive grants. Funding for the grant program and grant program administration is reflected in the FY 2024 PARCS budget and fully encumbered to the Fresno Arts Council consistent with the Agreement. Attachment: Resolution Project Specific Grant Guidelines General Operating Support Grant Guidelines City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1589 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-N. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember District 7 SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION - Establishing the City of Fresno CHIPS Incentive Program (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Attachment: Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MK/NE 7-0 R. 2023-291 APPROVED ON CONSENT City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1607 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.-O. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TYLER MAXWELL, Council President District 4 SUBJECT ***Resolution - Directing the City Manager or Designee to Notify the Council of Any Delays to Existing Citywide and District Projects Caused by New Public Works or Capital Projects, Acceptance of Grant Funds or the Reprograming of Funds (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Attachment: City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 MOVED TO 11/16/2023 NEW FILE ID 23-1645 1 of 3 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ______ Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO NOTIFY THE COUNCIL OF ANY DELAYS TO EXISTING CITYWIDE AND DISTRICT PROJECTS CAUSED BY NEW PUBLIC WORKS OR CAPITAL PROJECTS, ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS OR THE REPROGRAMING OF FUNDS WHEREAS, the Council through its legislative process, has approved and adopted both citywide and district Public Works projects; and WHEREAS, the Public Works and Capital Projects Departments are responsible for managing and implementing a variety of projects aimed at improving the City's infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the Council is entrusted with oversight and governance responsibilities to ensure that projects are effectively managed, and taxpayers' dollars are judiciously spent; and WHEREAS, new sources of funding, including but not limited to Measure P, Measure C, and ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) have resulted in an overall increase in capital projects added in the City by the City’s Department of Public Works and Capital Projects Department; and WHEREAS, while new capital improvement projects are vital to the continued prosperity of the City and the community at large and align with existing citywide goals, the recent influx has, in some instances, resulted in delays to previously approved or planned projects, causing public concern regarding the timely completion of projects; and 2 of 3 WHEREAS, transparent and timely communication between the Administration and the City Council regarding delays to Council approved projects is essential for maintaining public trust and effective governance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. The Administration is hereby directed to provide updates to the City Council of any material changes to existing project delivery timelines which will be occasioned by the approval of new Council, Mayoral, or Administration approved projects. Such updates must be provided prior to the approval of the new project and at least one week in advance of a Council vote on the new proposed project. 2. The updates may be provided at the time of new project approval and/or acceptance of funds by Council (i.e., enumerated in staff reports) or may be in the form of a memorandum to Council from the Administration. 3. The Administration is further directed, where possible, to present reasonable mitigation measures to minimize impacts on current project delivery timelines. 4. This resolution shall be effective upon final approval. 3 of 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, TODD STERMER, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2023. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2023 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2023 Mayor Veto: , 2023 Council Override Vote: , 2023 TODD STERMER, CMC City Clerk By: Date Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW JANZ City Attorney By: Angela M. Karst Date Senior Deputy City Attorney City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JENNIFER CLARK, Director Planning & Development Department BY:ROB HOLT, Supervising Planner Planning & Development Department SUBJECT HEARING to consider Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 pertaining to approximately 8.0 acres of property located on the east side of North Abby Street, between East Minarets/East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues (Council District 6) - Planning & Development Department. 1. DENY the appeal and ADOPT Environmental Assessment P22-04122, dated May 5, 2023, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION 1. DENY the appeal and ADOPT Environmental Assessment P22-04122, dated May 5, 2023, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Brian Saltikov of Living Spaces has filed Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 pertaining to an approximately 8-acre parcel located on the east side of North Abby Street, between East Alluvial/East Minarets and East Spruce Avenues (Exhibit A). Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 proposes the construction of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture showroom with on- and off-site improvements including but not limited to parking, landscaping, and sidewalks. The proposed project was reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and determined to be a “project”. However, it was determined that the project was not exempt from CEQA as it did not qualify for a Statutory or Categorical Exemption. Therefore, an initial study was prepared which determined the project would not result in significant impacts on the environmental with the incorporation of applicable mitigation measures. As such, a Mitigated Negative Declaration dated May 5, 2023 was prepared. The project and environmental assessment were approved and adopted by the Director on July 24, 2023. The Director’s decision to approve the project and adopt the environmental assessment were City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 14 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 GB/NE 7-0 File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 2023.The Director’s decision to approve the project and adopt the environmental assessment were appealed on August 8, 2023 (Exhibit C). Pursuant to FMC Section 15-5017(A)(1),appeals of Director’s decisions shall be referred to the Planning Commission for consideration.However,under FMC Sections 15-5017(A)(3)and 15-5005 (A),appeals of an environmental determination shall be referred directly to the City Council. Therefore,the Development Permit Application No.P22-04122 was considered by the Planning Commission and the related Environmental Assessment No.P22-04122 shall be considered by the City Council. The Planning Commission considered Development Permit Application No.P22-04122 and Environmental Assessment No.P22-04122 as presented by staff in accordance with FMC Section 15 -5017 at the hearing held on October 4,2023.Various members of the public spoke on the project during the hearings.After close of the hearing on October 4,2023,the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of Environmental Assessment No.P22-04122 and deny the appeal and uphold the Director’s decision to approve Development Permit Application No.P22-04122,with five votes in favor to zero votes against, one member absent and one member recusing (Exhibit L). No appeals were received following Planning Commission’s action and recommendation.Therefore, the City Council is only considering the environmental assessment pursuant to FMC Sections 15- 5017 and 15-5005,which require a City Council Hearing and Action to consider the appeal of Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal of the environmental determination and adopt Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122. BACKGROUND The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Fresno General Plan and Woodward Park Community Plan.These plans designate the approximately 8-acre property for Commercial - Regional planned land uses.The existing underlying CR (Commercial -Regional)zone district is consistent with the Commercial -Regional planned land use designation.The surrounding land uses to the north and south are planned and zoned for Commercial -Regional uses.Properties to the west are planned and zoned for Corridor/Center Mixed Use uses.A Kohl’s department store is located directly north of the subject property,the Costco shopping center and Home Depot is located directly south of the subject property,various automotive repair and retail stores and one single- family residence are located directly west of the subject property (separated by North Abby Street), and State Route 41 is located directly east of the subject property.The property was previously developed as a family entertainment park (Boomers),has since been demolished in 2017,and is currently disturbed vacant land. Development Permit Application No.P22-04122 proposes the construction of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture showroom with on-and off-site improvements including but not limited to parking,landscaping,and sidewalks.Additional information is provided in the attached operational statement and exhibits (Exhibit E). The proposed project was reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378 and determined to be a “project”.As a project,the proposed City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 2 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: activity is subject to CEQA review. Pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines,it was further determined the project did not qualify for a Statutory Exemption (Article 18 of CEQA),Categorical Exemption (Article 19 of CEQA), Common Sense Exemption,or exemptions for qualifying agricultural housing,affordable housing, and residential infill projects.Therefore,pursuant to Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines,an initial study was conducted to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment. As described in more detail in the Environmental Findings section below,the proposed project has been determined to be a subsequent project that is not fully within the scope of the Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report SCH No.2019050005 (“PEIR”)as provided by the CEQA,as codified in the Public Resources Code (PRC)Section 21157.1(d)and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15177(c).Furthermore,it was determined that all applicable mitigation measures of the PEIR have been applied to the project,together with project specific mitigation measures,as necessary to assure that the project will not cause significant adverse cumulative impacts,growth inducing impacts and irreversible significant effects beyond those identified by the PEIR as provided by CEQA Section 15178(a).As such,a Mitigated Negative Declaration dated May 5,2023 was prepared for the proposed project. ANALYSIS Land Use and Zoning The Fresno General Plan and Woodward Park Community Plan designate the 8-acre property for Commercial -Regional planned land uses.Furthermore,the subject property is zoned CR/UGM/cz ( Commercial Regional/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning).The underlying CR zone district is consistent with the Commercial - Regional planned land use designation. The Commercial -Regional planned land use designation and CR zone district are intended to meet local and regional retail demand,such as large-scale retail,office,civic and entertainment uses, shopping malls with large-format or "big-box"retail and supporting uses such as gas stations and hotels. Buildings are typically larger-footprint and urban-scaled. Development and design standards will create a pedestrian-orientation within centers and along major corridors,with parking generally on the side or rear of major buildings,but automobile-oriented uses also will be accommodated on identified streets and frontages.The proposal of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture showroom is considered a large-scale retail building and use, consistent with the intent of the Commercial - Regional planned land use designation. Pursuant to Section 15-1202 of the Fresno Municipal Code (“FMC”),furniture stores may be classified under the “General Retail”use classification definition.However,pursuant to FMC Section 15-6704,this specific classification is limited to establishments with 80,000 square feet or less of sales area.Therefore,the proposed project is more appropriately classified as “Large-Format Retail” which includes retail establishments greater than 80,000 square feet.Per Table 15-1102 of the FMC, Large-Format Retail is permitted in the CR (Commercial - Regional) zone district. Given the conditions of approval dated June 2,2023,Development Permit Application No.P22- 04122 will meet all the provisions of the FMC,including but not limited to setbacks,screening between different land uses,parking,landscaping,and will comply with all applicable designCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 3 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: between different land uses,parking,landscaping,and will comply with all applicable design guidelines and development standards for furniture stores in the CR (Commercial -Regional)zone district. Traffic and Circulation The Public Works Department,Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed the potential traffic related impacts for the proposed project and has determined that the streets adjacent to and near the subject site will be able to accommodate the quantity and kind of traffic which may be potentially generated subject to the standard city requirements for street improvements and subject to the project specific mitigation measures determined applicable by the City of Fresno Traffic Engineer.These requirements generally include:(1)street dedications;(2)Street improvements,(including,but not limited to,construction of concrete curbs,gutters,pavement,underground street lighting systems; and (3)Payment of applicable impact fees (including,but not limited to,the Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI)Fee,Fresno Major Street Impact (FMSI)Fee,and the Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF)Fee.These requirements are outlined within the memorandum from the City Traffic Engineer dated December 21,2022,which are included in the Conditions of Approval dated July 24, 2023. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Senate Bill (SB)743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)instead of Level of Service (LOS).VMT measures how much actual auto travel (additional miles driven)a proposed project would create on California roads.If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads,the project may cause a significant transportation impact. The State CEQA Guidelines were amended to implement SB 743,by adding Section 15064.3. Among its provisions,Section 15064.3 confirms that,except with respect to transportation projects,a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. Therefore,LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities are no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(4)states that “[a]lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled,including whether to express the change in absolute terms,per capita,per household or in any other measure.A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence.Any assumptions used to estimate used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project.The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.” On June 25,2020,the City of Fresno adopted CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds,pursuant to Senate Bill 743 to be effective of July 1,2020.The thresholds described therein are referred to herein as the City of Fresno VMT Thresholds.The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds document was prepared and adopted consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7.The December 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory)published by the Governor’s Office of PlanningCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 4 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory)published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR),was utilized as a reference and guidance document in the preparation of the Fresno VMT Thresholds. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds adopted a screening standard and criteria that can be used to screen out qualified projects that meet the adopted criteria from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds Section 3.0 regarding Project Screening discusses a variety of projects that may be screened out of a VMT analysis including specific development and transportation projects.For development projects,conditions may exist that would presume that a development project has a less than significant impact.These may be size,location,proximity to transit, or trip ‐ making potential. The proposed project is eligible to screen out because pursuant to the City of Fresno VMT Thresholds Section 3.0 (Project Screening),the project is within 0.5 miles of a Transit Priority Area or a High-Quality Transit Area,has a floor area ratio (FAR)less than 0.75 (proposed FAR at 0.31),and provides an excessive amount of parking (proposes 298 parking spaces when 140 is the minimum requirement).Therefore,the project would result in a less-than-significant VMT impact and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Public Services Public Utilities (Sewer, Water, and Solid Waste) The subject property is located within the Pinedale County Water District service area,and it is anticipated that Pinedale County Water District will provide sewer service and water services (potable water and fire protection) to the proposed development. The project was reviewed by the Department of Public Utilities to ensure that the proposed trash enclosures for the project comply will any applicable policies related to capacity,access,and overall design to ensure that service can be provided to the site without impacts to the site,surrounding properties,or solid waste service to the city.The requirements listed above,and additional requirements have been listed in the Department of Public Utilities memo dated December 13, 2022. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) According to the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (“FMFCD”),the subject site is not located within a flood prone or hazard area.Permanent drainage service is available provided the developer can verify to the satisfaction of the City that runoff can be safely conveyed to the Master Plan inlet(s). Drainage from the site shall be directed towards an existing private storm drain system facility. Fire The City of Fresno Fire Department reviewed the proposed project and has determined that adequate Fire service will be available subject to compliance with Fire Department comments or conditions of approval related to access and design of proposed project.Review for compliance with fire and life safety requirements for the interior of proposed buildings and the intended use are City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 5 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: fire and life safety requirements for the interior of proposed buildings and the intended use are reviewed by both the Fire Department and the Building and Safety Services Section of the Planning and Development Department when a submittal for building plan review is made as required by the California Building Code. Other Agencies All comments received from the applicable agencies have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for Development Permit Application P22-04122.The project will comply with all department comments and conditions and all zoning requirements as incorporated into the conditions of approval dated July 24, 2023. LAND USE PLANS AND POLICIES Fresno General Plan The Fresno General Plan designates the subject site for Commercial -Regional planned land uses and provides objectives to guide in the development of these projects.Development Permit Application No.P22-04122 meets all policies and objectives of the Fresno General Plan.The following are excerpts of such objectives. Objective: LU-6:Retain and enhance existing commercial areas to strengthen Fresno’s economic base and site new office, retail, and lodging use districts to serve neighborhoods and regional visitors. Implementing Policies: LU-6-a:Foster high quality design,diversity,and a mix of amenities in new development with uses through the consideration of guidelines, consistent with the Urban Form policies of this Plan. LU-6-e: Promote economic growth with regional commercial centers. The proposed development will enhance the existing surrounding commercial areas that will continue to strengthen Fresno’s economic base.In addition,the new commercial building façade complies with the FMC and provides a high-quality design. The subject property is adjacent to an existing shopping center to the south and will connect to the adjacent developed commercial property to the north providing an extension of an existing regional commercial center. Woodward Park Community Plan Upon reviewing the policies contained in the Woodward Park Community Plan,staff has determined that there are no policies that are applicable or are more restrictive than those contained in the FMC or the Fresno General Plan. PUBLIC NOTICE AND INPUT City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 6 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: Council District Project Review Committee The Council District 6 Project Review Committee reviewed the project at their regular meeting on February 6, 2023 and recommended approval of the project, 7 votes to 0. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration On May 5,2023,a public notice of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment Application No.P22-04122 (Exhibit J)was published.One (1)response letter has been received which included several comments and concerns regarding the EA and a request to receive a Notice of Director Action.This response letter was included as an attachment to an appeal of the Notice of Action and EA (Exhibit C)that staff reviewed and analyzed below under “Analysis of the Appeal Letter.” Notice of Action On July 24,2023,the project was approved by the Planning and Development Director and a Notice of Action (Exhibit J)was provided to individuals who previously requested to be notified of the project approval. On August 8,2023,one appeal letter was received which included an appeal of the Director’s approval and the environmental determination (Exhibit C).Staff’s review and analysis of the appeal letter is below under “Analysis of the Appeal Letter.” Notice of Planning Commission Hearing The Planning and Development Department mailed notices of this Planning Commission hearing to all surrounding property owners within 1000 feet of the subject property on September 22,2023, pursuant to Section 15-5007 of the FMC (Exhibit F). Fresno City Planning Commission Action On October 4,2023,the Planning Commission considered the item as presented by staff,followed by a brief presentation by the applicant.Various members of the public spoke in support of and opposition to the project during the hearing. After a complete hearing,the Planning Commission voted to deny the appeal and uphold the Director’s decision to approve Development Permit Application No.P22-04122 and recommend adoption of Environmental Assessment No.P22-04122,with five (5)votes to zero (0),one (1) Commissioner absent and one (1)recusing.The Planning Commission resolution is attached as Exhibit L. Notice of City Council Hearing On October 19,2023,the Planning and Development Department mailed notices of the City Council Hearing to surrounding property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property in accordance with FMC Section 15-5007 (Exhibit M). City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 7 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL LETTER One appeal letter was received in response to the Notice of Action issued for this project.Staff was provided a response letter by the environmental consultant (Exhibit D)of the project that analyzed and responded to all claims from the appeal letter, which is summarized below. (1)Below is an analysis of the issues raised in the appeal letter dated August 8, 2023 (Exhibit C). Issue #1:The project may result in significant impacts to Biological Resources.The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND)inadequately characterized the existing environmental setting as it relates to wildlife.Due to the presence of ground squirrels on the project site,protocol-level surveys should have been performed for burrowing owls and nesting birds and raptors,such as the Swainson’s hawk.Instead,only a single reconnaissance-level survey was conducted on January 19,2023.This survey was inadequate because the survey of the project site does not provide substantial evidence of the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site because the survey was not conducted during the breeding season when the owls may be present (February 1 to August 31,California Department of Fish and Wildlife).The same baseline problem also afflicts the ISMND’s discussion of other nesting bird species of concern on or in the vicinity of the project site,such as the Swainson’s hawk.Because of the absence of detection surveys,the ISMND only speculates that habitat is marginal and occurrence likelihoods low.Only with an accurate baseline could the ISMND purport to assess the impacts on nesting raptors and other bird species of concern.Accordingly,a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR for the project because of the lack of relevant investigation of the site’s biological resources and the possible use of the site by sensitive wildlife species. Response: The existing environmental setting was described accurately at the time of the field survey.The Biological Resources Assessment stated that the project site was previously developed as a family entertainment park from approximately 1998 to 2017.In 2017,the park was demolished and cleared where the property has remained in its current condition since.Some lands in the vicinity of the project site are fallow/vacant lots,however most of the lands are developed with a mixture of commercial developments, schools, and residential uses. There are no undisturbed open spaces in the vicinity of the project site.Because the project is surrounded by development and isolated from open spaces,the site lacks adjacent foraging habitat needed for burrowing owl,therefore limiting the habitat suitability.Additionally,soil and vegetation within the project site are disturbed from the demolition of the park in 2017.Worn foot paths,litter,vehicle tracks,and trampling are evident throughout the project site,making the project site less likely for burrowing owls to utilize.Furthermore,as stated in the Biological Resources Assessment in the ISMND,the perimeter of the project site contains palm and oak trees that could provide suitable perching locations for nesting raptor species,thereby making the site less suitable for burrowing owl. Lastly,CNDDB and eBird records of burrowing owl were also checked to informCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 8 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: Lastly,CNDDB and eBird records of burrowing owl were also checked to inform the survey and habitat suitability.No records of burrowing owl have been documented within the project site or the immediate surroundings.Similarly,the rationale regarding the site conditions documented and described above is applicable to Swainson’s hawk.Tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent within the project site because the trees present are immature and small in stature and do not provide conductive nesting habitat for Swainson’s hawk or other raptor species.Therefore,the baseline conditions of the project site accurately reflect that the foraging habitat is marginal and nesting is not expected for Swainson’s hawk.Protocol level surveys are not warranted given the conditions described above. Issue #2:The pre-construction surveys identified in the ISMND for burrowing owls and nesting birds are not sufficient to address potential impacts to birds that may be present on the project site.The mitigation measures for burrowing owl surveys and pre-construction surveys will come too late either to disclose the project’s anticipated impacts or to fully mitigate impacts to birds,including burrowing owls and nesting raptors.Instead,detection surveys need to be performed to professional standards because detection surveys provide the bases for impact assessments and formulation of mitigation measures.Detection surveys also inform pre-construction surveys.By failing to determine the actual baseline of burrowing owls and other nesting-bird species’reliance on the site for roosting, nesting,and foraging,and instead waiting until 5 to 30 days before construction to determine what roosts,nests,and birds may suffer impacts from the project, the ISMND fails to evaluate and mitigate the project’s potential significant impacts to special-status bird species. Response: The mitigation measures outlining the pre-construction surveys adequately address and avoid potential adverse impacts to these species and would mitigate for any potential impacts if the species were found within the project site.Furthermore,the pre-construction measure and timing for the burrowing owl survey is a standard timeline that is recognized by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)and is described in the CDFW Burrowing Owl Survey and Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines.Additionally,the measure states if burrowing owls are present,specific avoidance,den excavation,passive relocation,and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by the CDFW, which would avoid or mitigate impacts to this species. Therefore,pre-construction surveys would avoid and mitigate impacts to Swainson’s hawk and other nesting birds. Issue #3:The ISMND’s analysis of Energy impacts is conclusory and fails to provide substantial evidence that the project’s energy impacts are less than significant. The standard under CEQA is whether the project would result in wasteful, inefficient,or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.Failing to undertake an investigation into renewable energy options that might be available or appropriate for a project violates CEQA.Energy conservation under CEQA is defined as the “wise and efficient use of energy,”which is achieved byCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 9 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: defined as the “wise and efficient use of energy,”which is achieved by decreasing overall per capita energy consumption,decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal,natural gas,and oil,and increasing reliance on renewable energy resources.Noting compliance with the California Appliance Efficiency Regulations and reliance on Title 20’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations does not constitute an adequate analysis of energy and does not satisfy the requirements for an adequate discussion of the project’s energy impacts.There is no discussion of the project’s cost effectiveness in terms of energy requirements. There is no adequate discussion of energy consuming equipment and processes that will be used during the construction or operation of the project.The project’s energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for building maintenance were also not identified.The ISMND attempts to satisfy the analysis of energy impacts by estimating the project’s percentage of energy use compared to energy and fuel use for the entirety of Fresno County.CEQA prohibits this type of “drop in the bucket”analysis.Additionally,the effect of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity has not been addressed.The agency has to implement all feasible energy mitigation measures unless it has substantial evidence to show that the proposed measures are infeasible.An example would be a recently adopted new ordinance in San Francisco requires 100 percent of parking spaces have electric vehicle charging stations.The project proposes only 30 EV charging stations of the proposed 298 parking spaces.In conclusion,because the ISMND failed to adequately analyze and mitigate the project’s potentially wasteful,inefficient,and unnecessary consumption of energy,an EIR should be prepared to address the project’s potential significant energy impacts and mitigate those impacts accordingly. Response: As discussed in the Energy impacts section of the ISMND,thresholds for impacts related to energy used in the analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.The proposed project would increase the demand for energy through day-to-day operations and fuel consumption associated with project construction.During project construction,petroleum fuels would be the primary sources of energy for construction activities.Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an efficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the proposed project.Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Energy consumed by the proposed project would be associated with natural gas use,electricity consumption,and fuel used for vehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project.Energy and natural gas consumption was estimated for the proposed project using default energy intensities by land use type in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod).Based on the operational energy consumption estimates shown in the ISMND,operation of the proposed project would increase the annual electricity consumption in Fresno County by approximately 0.1 percent and increase the annual natural gas consumption in Fresno Couty by less than 0.1 percent.Furthermore,vehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use inCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 10 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and diesel fuel usage.Additionally,the proposed project would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices,and modern appliances and equipment,in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations.Also as discussed in the ISMND,PG&E is the private utility that would supply the proposed project’s electricity and natural gas services.The ISMND properly determined that the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts to energy.As such,identification and analysis of mitigation measures is not required. Issue #4:The ISMND fails to adequately evaluate and mitigate health risks from diesel particulate matter (DPM)emissions.An EIR should be prepared to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the project’s operational and construction related DPM.The ISMND incorrectly concluded that the project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (HRA). Given the proximity of the project to single-family residences within 65 feet of the project site and Pinedale Elementary School within 1,000 feet of the project site, construction and operational HRAs need to be prepared to determine the potential significant health risk impacts to families,students,and teachers from DPM emissions related to the project.Failing to prepare an HRA,the project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions.Also failing to prepare an HRA for nearby,existing sensitive receptors,the ISMND fails to compare the excess health risk impact of the project to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million.Without conducting an HRA,the ISMND also fails to evaluate the cumulative lifetime cancer risk to nearby, existing receptors from the project’s construction and operation together.The ISMND relies on inadequate mitigation to support is conclusion that the project will result in less-than-significant health risk impacts from construction related emissions.Mitigation Measure AIR-1 only requires certain controls consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)to be included as specifications for the project and implemented at the construction site.The ISMND should also require construction equipment used at the project site to meet Tier 4 final emissions standards to reduce construction related emissions as well as the adverse health risk impacts of those emissions on nearby sensitive receptors. Response: The SJVAPCD’s Update to the District’s Risk Management Policy to Address the OEHHA Revised Risk Assessment Guidance Document states that emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs)are considered significant if an HRS shows an increased risk of greater than 20 in 1 million.The OEHHA Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines has determined that long-term exposure to diesel exhaust particulates poses the highest cancer risk of any TAC it has evaluated.In addition,CARB has also identified DPM emitted by off-road,dieselCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 11 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: evaluated.In addition,CARB has also identified DPM emitted by off-road,diesel -fueled engines emit DPM as a TAC.As such,the TAC of concern would be DPM associated with the use of diesel engines during project construction and operation.For risk assessment procedures,the OEHHA specifies that the surrogate for whole diesel exhaust is DPM.HRA analyses typically use PM10 emissions to represent DPM emissions,consistent with OEHHA guidance.As shown in the ISMND,PM10 emissions,which are a surrogate for TAC emissions during construction,would be 0.2 tons per year,which is well below the SJVAPCD threshold of 15.0 tons per year,indicating that significant mass emissions of PM10 would not occur and a significant health risk would also not occur.Additionally,once operational,the proposed project would result in PM10 emissions of 0.1 tons per year,which is also well below the SJVAPCD threshold of 15.0 tons per year,indicating that significant mass emissions of PM10 would not occur and a significant health risk would also not occur.Therefore,the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels of TACs. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS An environmental assessment initial study was prepared for this project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines.This process included the distribution of requests for comment from other responsible or affected agencies and interested organizations. Preparation of the environmental assessment necessitated a thorough review of the proposed project and relevant environmental issues and considered previously prepared environmental and technical studies pertinent to the Woodward Park Community Plan area,including the Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report SCH No.2019050005 (“PEIR”).These environmental and technical studies have examined projected sewage generation rates of planned urban uses,the capacity of existing sanitary sewer collection and treatment facilities,and optimum alternatives for increasing capacities;groundwater aquifer resource conditions;water supply production and distribution system capacities; traffic carrying capacity of the planned major street system. The proposed project has been determined to be a subsequent project that is not fully within the scope of the PEIR as provided by the CEQA,as codified in the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21157.1(d)and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15177(c).Therefore,the Planning and Development Department proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project, which is tiered off the PEIR. It has been further determined that all applicable mitigation measures of the PEIR have been applied to the project,together with project specific mitigation measures,as necessary to assure that the project will not cause significant adverse cumulative impacts,growth inducing impacts and irreversible significant effects beyond those identified by the PEIR as provided by CEQA Section 15178(a).In addition,pursuant to Public Resources Code,Section 21157.6(b)(1),staff has determined that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the PEIR was certified and that no new information,which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the PEIR was certified as complete,has become available.Therefore,it has been determined based upon the evidence in the record that the project will not have a significantCity of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 12 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: been determined based upon the evidence in the record that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and that the filing of a mitigated negative declaration is appropriate in accordance with the provisions of CEQA Section 21157.5(a)(2)and CEQA Guidelines Section 15178 (b)(1) and (2). Based upon the attached environmental assessment and applicable mitigation measures,staff has determined that there is no evidence in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project.A public notice of the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment Application No.P22- 04122 (Exhibit I) was published in the Fresno Bee on May 5, 2023. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because the project does not include a bid or award of a construction or service contract. FISCAL IMPACT Affirmative action by the City Council will result in timely deliverance of the review and processing of the applications as is reasonably expected by the applicant.Prudent financial management is demonstrated by the expeditious completion of this land use application and that fee is,in turn, funding the respective operations of the Planning and Development Department. CONCLUSION The appropriateness of the proposed project has been examined for its consistency with the goals and policies of the Woodward Park Community Plan and Fresno General Plan;its compatibility with surrounding existing or proposed uses;and its avoidance or mitigation of potentially significant adverse environmental impacts.These factors have been evaluated as described above and by the accompanying environmental assessment.Upon consideration of this evaluation,it can be concluded that the proposed Environmental Assessment No.P22-04122 is appropriate for the subject property. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use & Zoning Map Exhibit C - Appeal Letter [8-8-2023] Exhibit D - Response to Appeal Letter [6-15-2023] Exhibit E - Exhibits Exhibit F - Fresno Municipal Code Findings Exhibit G - Public Hearing Notice Radius Map (1,000 feet) Exhibit H - Conditions of Approval [7-24-2023] Exhibit I - Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 [5-5-2023] Exhibit J - Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration [5-5-2023] Exhibit K - Notice of Action [7-23-2023] Exhibit L - Planning Commission Resolution No. 13812 Exhibit M - City Council Public Hearing Notice & Noticing Map (1,000 feet) City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 13 of 14 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 23-1506 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: Exhibit N - Letter from Appellant [10-16-2023] Exhibit O - PowerPoint Presentation City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 14 of 14 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit A VICINITY MAP Subject Property Approx. 8 acres LEGEND E MINARETS/E ALLUVIAL AVE Exhibit B Zoning Map Subject Property E ALLUVIAL/E MINARETS AVE CR CR CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX CMX O General Plan Land Use Map Subject Property E ALLUVIAL/E MINARETS AVE Exhibit C By E-mail August 8, 2023 Jennifer K. Clark, Director Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Philip Siegrist, Planner Planning and Development Department City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Jennifer.Clark@fresno.gov Robert.Holt@fresno.gov Philip.Siegrist@fresno.gov Re: Appeals of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department Director’s Decision to Approve the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122, and the City of Fresno’s Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Living Spaces Retail Project Dear Director Clark, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Siegrist: I am writing on behalf of the Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union No. 294 (“LIUNA”) and its members living and/or working in or around the City of Fresno (“City”). LIUNA hereby appeals the Planning and Development Department Director’s decision to approve the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 on July 24, 2023, and the City’s approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) (Document No. E202310000130) on July 25, 2023 for the project known as the Living Spaces Retail Project located on the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues (APN: 303-201-27) in the City and County of Fresno, California by applicant Living Spaces (“Project”). These appeals are filed pursuant to the City of Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5005, establishing procedures for appealing California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) determinations to the City Council, and Municipal Code section 15-5017, establishing the procedures for appealing Decisions of the Director to the Planning Commission by filing a written appeal with the Director. Members of LIUNA live and/or work in the vicinity of the proposed Project. They breathe the air, enjoy observing wildlife, want to ensure maximum energy efficiency, and will suffer other environmental impacts of the Project unless it is properly mitigated. LIUNA is concerned that the MND prepared for the Project fails to comply with CEQA Living Spaces Retail Project Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 August 8, 2023 Page 2 of 2 and that the Planning and Development Department did not adequately address its May 26, 2023 comments, which are included at Attachment 1 to this letter and incorporated by reference in this appeal. Specifically, the MND fails to adequately analyze the potential significant environmental impacts of the Project, including impacts to biological resources, including impacts on burrowing owls and nesting birds, air quality, health risks, and energy impacts. The City adopted the MND and approved a Development Permit Application for the Project despite evidence in the record establishing substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project will have significant environmental impacts. Given the fact that the record contains a fair argument that the Project will have significant environmental impacts, the Planning and Development Department should have prepared an EIR for the Project rather than an MND and refrained from approval of the Development Permit Application until the proper CEQA review was performed. Sincerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU DRURY LLP ATTACHMENT 1 May 26, 2023 Via E-mail Robert Holt, Supervising Planner City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 Robert.Holt@fresno.gov City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 PublicCommentsPlanning@fresno.gov Re: Comment on Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Dear Mr. Holt and City of Fresno Planning and Development Department: I am writing on behalf of Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22-04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the “Applicant”), and prepared for the Project, including all actions related or referring to the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8-acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”). LIUNA is concerned that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND” or “MND”) prepared for the Project is legally inadequate. After reviewing the MND, we conclude that it fails as an informational document, and that there is a fair argument that the Project may have adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, we request that the City of Fresno (the “City”) prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code (“PRC”) section 21000, et seq. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Project is for the construction and operation of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking. More specifically, the Project would include an 81,608 square-foot showroom, a 4,682 square-foot stockroom and attached loading zone for delivery vehicles and customer pick up in the northeast corner, as well as other features. The Project would also include 298 parking stalls, including 30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls and 36 clean air/vanpool parking stalls. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 2 of 12 The Project site is an approximately 8-acre site located in the City of Fresno with commercial and residential uses to the west. Single-family residences are located approximately 65 feet west of the Project site across North Abby Street. The Pinedale Elementary School is about 900 feet to the west of the Project site. The site is primarily vacant, with the exception of two concrete utility structures located on the southwest corner and the central portion of the project site respectively. The City prepared an initial study and mitigated negative declaration for the proposed Project, which found that the Project would have no potentially significant impacts. However, as discussed below, the Project may have significant biological resources, energy, air quality, and health risk impacts requiring that the City prepare an EIR. LEGAL STANDARD As the California Supreme Court has held, “[i]f no EIR has been prepared for a nonexempt project, but substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may result in significant adverse impacts, the proper remedy is to order preparation of an EIR.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310, 319-320 (CBE v. SCAQMD) (citing No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75, 88; Brentwood Assn. for No Drilling, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 491, 504–505).) “Significant environmental effect” is defined very broadly as “a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment.” (Pub. Res. Code (“PRC”) § 21068; see also 14 CCR § 15382.) An effect on the environment need not be “momentous” to meet the CEQA test for significance; it is enough that the impacts are “not trivial.” (No Oil, Inc., 13 Cal.3d at 83.) “The ‘foremost principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109 (CBE v. CRA).) The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1214 (Bakersfield Citizens); Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 927.) The EIR is an “environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached the ecological points of no return.” (Bakersfield Citizens, 124 Cal.App.4th at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a “document of accountability,” intended to “demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action.” (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process “protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) An EIR is required if “there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC § 21080(d); see also Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) In very limited circumstances, an agency may avoid preparing an EIR by issuing a negative declaration, a written statement Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 3 of 12 briefly indicating that a project will have no significant impact thus requiring no EIR (14 CCR § 15371), only if there is not even a “fair argument” that the project will have a significant environmental effect. (PRC §§ 21100, 21064.) Since “[t]he adoption of a negative declaration . . . has a terminal effect on the environmental review process,” by allowing the agency “to dispense with the duty [to prepare an EIR],” negative declarations are allowed only in cases where “the proposed project will not affect the environment at all.” (Citizens of Lake Murray v. San Diego (1989) 129 Cal.App.3d 436, 440.) Where an initial study shows that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, a mitigated negative declaration may be appropriate. However, a mitigated negative declaration is proper only if the project revisions would avoid or mitigate the potentially significant effects identified in the initial study “to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and…there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC §§ 21064.5, 21080(c)(2); Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 331.) In that context, “may” means a reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment. (PRC §§ 21082.2(a), 21100, 21151(a); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927; League for Protection of Oakland’s etc. Historic Res. v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 904–05.) Under the “fair argument” standard, an EIR is required if any substantial evidence in the record indicates that a project may have an adverse environmental effect—even if contrary evidence exists to support the agency’s decision. (14 CCR § 15064(f)(1); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 931; Stanislaus Audubon Society v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 150-51; Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602.) The “fair argument” standard creates a “low threshold” favoring environmental review through an EIR rather than through issuance of negative declarations or notices of exemption from CEQA. (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928.) The “fair argument” standard is virtually the opposite of the typical deferential standard accorded to agencies. As a leading CEQA treatise explains: This ‘fair argument’ standard is very different from the standard normally followed by public agencies in their decision making. Ordinarily, public agencies weigh the evidence in the record and reach a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. [Citation]. The fair argument standard, by contrast, prevent s the lead agency from weighing competing evidence to determine who has a better argument concerning the likelihood or extent of a potential environmental impact. (Kostka & Zishcke, Practice Under the California Environmental Quality Act, §6.37 (2d ed. Cal. CEB 2021).) The Courts have explained that “it is a question of law, not fact, whether a fair argument exists, and the courts owe no deference to the lead agency’s determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928 (emphasis in original).) Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 4 of 12 For over forty years the courts have consistently held that an accurate and stable project description is a bedrock requirement of CEQA—the sine qua non (that without which there is nothing) of an adequate CEQA document: Only through an accurate view of the project may affected outsiders and public decision-makers balance the proposal’s benefit against its environmental cost, consider mitigation measures, assess the advantage of terminating the proposal (i.e., the “no project” alternative) and weigh other alternatives in the balance. An accurate, stable and finite project description is the sine qua non of an informative and legally sufficient EIR. (County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 185 at 192–93.) CEQA therefore requires that an environmental review document provide an adequate description of the project to allow for the public and government agencies to participate in the review process through submitting public comments and making informed decisions. Lastly, CEQA requires that an environmental document include a description of the project’s environmental setting or “baseline.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15063(d)(2).) The CEQA “baseline” is the set of environmental conditions against which to compare a project’s anticipated impacts. (CBE v. SCAQMD, 48 Cal.4th at 321.) CEQA Guidelines section 15125(a) states, in pertinent part, that a lead agency’s environmental review under CEQA: …must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as they exist at the time [environmental analysis] is commenced, from both a local and regional perspective. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a Lead Agency determines whether an impact is significant. (See Save Our Peninsula Committee v. County of Monterey (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 124-25 (“Save Our Peninsula”).) As the court of appeal has explained, “the impacts of the project must be measured against the ‘real conditions on the ground,’” and not against hypothetical permitted levels. (Id. at 121-23.) DISCUSSION I. The Project May Result in Significant Impacts to Biological Resources. A. The IS/MND inadequately characterized the existing environmental setting as it relates to wildlife. The IS/MND’s baseline for biological impacts is inadequate, incomplete, and understates the biological values at the Project site. According to the IS/MND and the Biological Resources Assessment, included as Appendix B to the IS/MND, “a general biological survey of the project Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 5 of 12 site was conducted by an LSA Biologist on January 19, 2023.” (IS/MND, p. 37; IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 3.) In addition, “[a] literature review and records search was conducted on January 18, 2023, to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special- status plant and animal species in the project vicinity.” (IS/MND, p. 36.) The IS/MND reports “no special-status species hav[ing] been identified within the project site or in the vicinity of the site.” (Id., p. 38.) As a result, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he project site does not contain critical habitat that could support candidate, sensitive or special-status species.” (Id.) However, based on the literature review and the observations made during the January 2023 biological survey of the Project site, special-status bird species could be present and/or use the site for nesting, breeding, and/or foraging. The IS/MND reports that during the LSA biologist’s field survey of the Project site, the following species were observed: A total of seven wildlife species were observed on or near the project site during the January 2023 survey, including: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris; nonnative species), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). (Id., p. 37.) Regarding the observation of California ground squirrels on the Project site, the IS/MND states: While no special-status animal species (or signs of such species) were observed on site during the January 2023 survey, California ground squirrel burrows that could be used by burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) were observed in portions of the project site. None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey, although there is some potential for use by this species in the future. Potentially significant direct and/or indirect impacts, including mortality, harassment, or other forms of incidental take, could occur if construction-related ground disturbance occurs in or around an occupied burrow. (Id.) The occurrence of California ground squirrels is also significant because ground squirrels are prey of large raptors such as bald eagle, golden eagle, ferruginous hawk and Swainson’s hawk. Due to the presence of ground squirrels on the Project site, protocol-level surveys should have been performed for burrowing owls and nesting birds and raptors, such as the Swainson’s hawk. Instead, only a single reconnaissance-level survey was conducted on January 19, 2023. This survey was inadequate for several reasons. First, the January 2023 field survey of the Project site does not provide substantial evidence of the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. The lack of evidence of burrowing owls on the Project site was not necessarily because they were not there, but because Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 6 of 12 the survey was not conducted during the breeding season when the owls may be present and did not adhere to the survey protocols for burrowing owls prepared by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”). According to CDFW: Burrowing owls are more detectable during the breeding season with detection probabilities being highest during the nestling stage (Conway et al. 2008). In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from 1 February to 31 August (Haug et al. 1993, Thompsen 1971) with some variances by geographic location and climatic conditions. Several researchers suggest three or more survey visits during daylight hours (Haug and Diduik 1993, CBOC 1997, Conway and Simon 2003) and recommend each visit occur at least three weeks apart during the peak of the breeding season, commonly accepted in California as between 15 April and 15 July (CBOC 1997). Conway and Simon (2003) and Conway et al. (2008) recommended conducting surveys during the day when most burrowing owls in a local area are in the laying and incubation period (so as not to miss early breeding attempts), during the nesting period, and in the late nestling period when most owls are spending time above ground. Non-breeding season (1 September to 31 January) surveys may provide information on burrowing owl occupancy, but do not substitute for breeding season surveys because results are typically inconclusive. Burrowing owls are more difficult to detect during the non-breeding season and their seasonal residency status is difficult to ascertain. (Cal. Dep’t Fish & Wildlife, Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Mar. 7, 2012), p. 6, at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83843 (emphasis added).) However, the biological survey of the Project site took place on January 19, 2023, which is outside of the breeding season for burrowing owls, as identified above by the CDFW. No survey was taken during the burrowing owl breeding season. The single survey that was conducted is also inconsistent with the surveys recommended in the CDFW’s available survey guidelines for burrowing owls. (See, e.g., p. 28.) For example, detection surveys are needed for burrowing owls present on and in the vicinity of the Project site that are consistent with the recommendations of CDFW. An EIR should be prepared along with a report of appropriate detection surveys. Thus, given the paucity of owls present in Fresno and the importance of that county to the breeding success of the species, the Project’s baseline must be informed by protocol-level surveys that can determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls at the site. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on that species of concern. The same baseline problem also afflicts the IS/MND’s discussion of other nesting bird species of concern on or in the vicinity of the Project site, such as the Swainson’s hawk. According to the IS/MND’s Biological Resources Assessment: Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 7 of 12 The project site contains marginal foraging habitat for certain raptors such as the Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), although suitable tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent from the project site. . . . Mature Palm and oak trees in the vicinity and along the perimeter outside of the site in the adjacent parcels could be used by raptors and other tree-nesting species. Overall, the project site and immediate surroundings contain foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species that are protected while nesting under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. (IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 7.) Because of the absence of detection surveys, the IS/MND only speculates that habitat is marginal and occurrence likelihoods low. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on nesting raptors and other bird species of concern. As multiple courts have explained: The agency [will] not be allowed to hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data.... CEQA places the burden of environmental investigation on government rather than the public. If the local agency has failed to study an area of possible environmental impact, a fair argument may be based on the limited facts in the record. Deficiencies in the record may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences.” (Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 311; see also Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1378–79; Christward Ministry v. Superior Court (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 180, 197, 228 Cal.Rptr. 868 [fact that initial study checklist was incomplete and marked every impact “no” supported fair argument that project would have significant environmental effects].) Accordingly, a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR for the Project because of the lack of relevant investigation of the site’s biological resources and the possible use of the site by sensitive wildlife species. B. The pre-construction surveys identified in the IS/MND for burrowing owls and nesting birds are not sufficient to address potential impacts to birds that may be present at the Project site. After reviewing the proposed wildlife impact mitigations identified in the IS/MND related to pre-construction surveys for burrowing owl surveys (i.e. Mitigation Measure BIO-1), and nesting birds (i.e. Mitigation Measure BIO-2), we agree with the need for such pre- construction surveys. However, these recommended burrowing owl surveys and pre- construction surveys will come too late either to disclose the Project’s anticipated impacts or to fully mitigate impacts to birds, including burrowing owls and nesting raptors. Instead, detection surveys need to be performed to professional standards and that information used to disclose potential impacts and to inform the pre-construction surveys. Detection surveys are needed, because detection surveys provide the bases for impact assessments and formulation of mitigation measures. They also inform pre-construction surveys, which are otherwise performed Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 8 of 12 in a rushed manner just ahead of construction. By failing to determine the actual baseline of burrowing owls and other nesting-bird species’ reliance on the site for roosting, nesting, and foraging, and instead waiting until five to thirty days before construction to determine what roosts, nests, and birds may suffer impacts from the Project, the IS/MND fails to evaluate and mitigate the Project’s potential significant impacts to special-status bird species. II. The IS/MND’s Analysis of Energy Impacts is Conclusory and Fails to Provide Substantial Evidence that the Project’s Energy Impacts are Less than Significant. Contrary to the IS/MND, the construction and operation of the Project could potentially cause wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 46- 49.) The IS/MND states that “[t]he proposed project would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and gasoline.” (Id., p. 46.) However, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to energy, and no mitigation is required.” (Id., p. 49.) Regarding the Project’s construction-related gasoline impacts, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts will be less than significant, stating: Petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact during project construction. (Id., p. 46.) Turning to the Project’s operational energy use, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts to natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel use for vehicle and truck trips associated with Project operation will be less than significant because: • [E]lectricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total electricity demand. (Id., p. 47.) • [N]atural gas demand associated with the proposed project would only be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total natural gas demand. (Id., pp. 47- 48.) • [V]ehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and by less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage. (Id., pp. 47-48.) Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 9 of 12 In addition to the IS/MND’s general estimates regarding the Project’s construction and operational-related natural gas, electricity, and fuel use, above, the IS/MND also bases its less than significant construction and operational energy use conclusion on the following: [The] proposed new development would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). The expected energy consumption during construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent with typical usage rates for commercial uses; however, energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings. (Id., p. 48.) Lastly, concerning whether or not the Project would “[c]onflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency,” the IS/MND concludes: The proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact to regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with California’s energy conservation plans as described in the [California Energy Commission’s] Integrated Energy Policy Reports. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (IS/MND, p. 49.) The standard under CEQA is whether the Project would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Failing to undertake “an investigation into renewable energy options that might be available or appropriate for a project” violates CEQA. (California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 213; see also, League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer (“League to Save Lake Tahoe”) (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 164-168.) Energy conservation under CEQA is defined as the “wise and efficient use of energy.” (CEQA Guidelines, app. F, § I.) The “wise and efficient use of energy” is achieved by “(1) decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, (2) decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil, and (3) increasing reliance on renewable energy resources.” (Id.) Noting compliance with the California Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit 20, §§ 1601–1608 (Title 20)) does not constitute an adequate analysis of energy. (Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 256, 264-65.) Similarly, the court in City of Woodland held unlawful an energy analysis that relied on Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 10 of 12 compliance with California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 24, part 6 (Title 24)), that failed to assess transportation energy impacts, and that failed to address renewable energy impacts. (25 Cal.App.4th at pp. 209-13.) As such, the IS/MND’s reliance on Title 20’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations does not satisfy the requirements for an adequate discussion of the Project’s energy impacts. The IS/MND summarily concludes that the Project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. There is no discussion of the Project’s cost effectiveness in terms of energy requirements. There is no adequate discussion of energy consuming equipment and processes that will be used during the construction or operation of the Project, including, inter alia, the energy necessary for heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; and indoor, outdoor, and perimeter lighting. The Project’s energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for building maintenance was also not identified. The IS/MND attempts to satisfy the analysis of energy impacts by estimating the Project’s percentage of energy use compared to energy and fuel use for the entirety of Fresno County. CEQA prohibits this type of “drop in the bucket” analysis. (See Kings Cnty. Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 718; Friends of Oroville v. City of Oroville (2013) 219 Cal. App. 4th 83, 842.) In addition, the effect of the Project on peak and base period demands for electricity has not been addressed. This is of particular concern given recent events where California’s electric grid was significantly impacted by an unprecedented high energy demand as a result of a prolonged, record-breaking heat wave that affected the entire State of California for multiple days. For example, at the start of September 2022, California experienced extreme heat, with temperatures across the state 10 to 20 degrees hotter than normal, driving up energy demand and straining power generation equipment as people ran their air conditioning. On September 6, 2022, as a result of electricity supplies running low in the face of record heat and demand, the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) issued an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) 3, the highest energy alert, authorizing the grid operator to order rotating power outages to lower demand and stabilize the system if necessary. As grid conditions worsened, energy supplies were determined to be insufficient to cover demand and reserves, and an EEA 3 was declared, meaning controlled power outages were imminent or in process according to each utility’s emergency plan. The EEA 3 was in response to an evening peak electricity demand that was forecasted at more than 52,000 megawatts, which Cal-ISO stated was “a new historic all-time high for the grid, as the state endured the hottest day in this prolonged, record-breaking heat wave.” Here, the IS/MND fails to adequately analyze energy conservation. As such, the IS/MND’s conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In addition, under League to Save Lake Tahoe, the agency has to implement all feasible energy mitigation measures unless it has substantial evidence to show that the proposed measures are infeasible. (Save Lake Tahoe, 75 Cal.App.5th at 166-168; see also, id., pp. 159- 163.) An example of a feasible mitigation measure, which has recently been adopted as a new Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 11 of 12 ordinance in San Francisco, is the requirement that 100% of parking spaces have electric vehicle charging stations. According to the IS/MND, of the 298 parking stalls included in the Project, only “30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls” would be provided. (IS/MND, p. 3.) Since requiring all parking stalls to be EV stalls is likely feasible, the IS/MND must implement it as an energy efficient mitigation measure, or at minimum, provide substantial evidence that implementing the mitigation measure is unfeasible. As such, the IS/MND’s conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In conclusion, because the IS/MND failed to adequately analyze and mitigate the Project’s potentially wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy, an EIR should be prepared to address the Project’s potential significant energy impacts, and to mitigate those impacts accordingly. III. The IS/MND Fails to Adequately Evaluate and Mitigate Health Risks from Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions. One of the primary emissions of concern regarding health effects for land development projects is diesel particulate matter (“DPM”), which can be released during Project construction and operation. DPM consists of fine particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers including a subgroup of ultrafine particles (with a diameter less than 0.1 micrometers). Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gases and cancer-causing substances. Exposure to DPM is a recognized health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who may have other serious health problems. According to the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”), DPM exposure may lead to the following adverse health effects: aggravated asthma; chronic bronchitis; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations; decreased lung function in children; lung cancer; and premature deaths for those with heart or lung disease. An EIR should be prepared to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the Project’s operational and construction-related DPM. The IS/MND incorrectly concluded that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”). (See, IS/MND, p. 32.) Given the proximity of the Project to single-family residences within 65 feet of the Project site and Pinedale Elementary School within 1,000 feet of the Project site, construction and operational HRAs need to be prepared to determine the potential significant health risk impacts to families, students, and teachers from DPM emissions related to the Project. As such, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for two reasons. First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. The IS/MND’s conclusion is also inconsistent with the most recent guidance published by the Office of Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”). (See, “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 12 of 12 Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.) Second, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the excess health risk impact of the Project to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (“SJVAPCD”) specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million. Without conducting a quantified construction and operational HRA, the IS/MND also fails to evaluate the cumulative lifetime cancer risk to nearby, existing receptors from the Project’s construction and operation together. This is incorrect, and as a result, the IS/MND’s evaluation cannot be relied upon to determine Project significance. OEHHA guidance requires that the excess cancer risk be calculated separately for all sensitive receptor age bins, then summed to evaluate the total cancer risk posed by all Project activities. Therefore, in accordance with the most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted. Lastly, the IS/MND relies on inadequate mitigation (i.e. Mitigation Measure Air-1) to support its conclusion that the Project will result in less-than-significant health risk impacts from construction-related emissions. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 32-33.) Mitigation Measure Air-1 only requires certain controls consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) to be included as specifications for the Project and implemented at the construction site. (Id.) The IS/MND should also require construction equipment used at the Project site to meet Tier 4 Final emissions standards to reduce construction-related emissions as well as the adverse health risk impacts of those emissions on nearby sensitive receptors. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, LIUNA requests that an EIR be prepared for the Project and that it be circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU | DRURY LLP Exhibit D 1 CARLSBAD CLOVIS IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 2565 Alluvial Avenue, Suite 172, Clovis, California 93611 559.490.1210 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: June 15, 2023 TO: Robert Holt, Supervising Planner, City of Fresno FROM: Kyle Simpson, Principal SUBJECT: Living Spaces Fresno Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Response to Comments In accordance with Section 15074 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, prior to approving a project, the decision-making body of the Lead Agency shall consider the proposed environmental document together with any comments received during the public review process. Although there is no legal requirement to formally respond to comments on a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) as there is for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), this memorandum provides responses to the written comments received on the proposed Living Spaces Fresno Project (Project) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) to aid the City of Fresno decision-makers in their review of the proposed Project. The Draft IS/MND was available for public review and comment from May 5, 2023, to May 26, 2023. A total of one comment letter was received on the IS/MND. The comment letter is attached to this memorandum. In the following pages, the topic sections addressed in the comment and associated responses are enumerated to allow for cross-referencing of CEQA-related comments. As noted above, CEQA does not require or provide guidance on responding to comments on MNDs; therefore, this memorandum follows CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, applicable to responses to comments on EIRs, which requires that agencies respond only to significant environmental issues raised in connection with the proposed Project. Therefore, this document focuses primarily on responding to comments that relate to the adequacy of the information and environmental analysis provided in the IS/MND. The sections below list the comment received during the comment period (Section A), followed by the enumerated comment sections and responses to the comment (Section B). Text changes are included in the Errata to the IS/MND, which is a separate document. Text changes required by comments included in this memorandum are provided in the Errata to the IS/MND. A. COMMENT LETTER This memorandum includes a reproduction of the comment letter received on the IS/MND, and individual comments within the comment letter are numbered consecutively. The comment letter listed below was submitted to the City regarding the IS/MND. 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 2 LETTER 1 Laborers' International Union of North America, Local Union 294 (LIUNA) Victoria Yundt May 26, 2023 Please note that text within the comment letter that has not been numbered does not raise environmental issues or relate to the adequacy of the information or analysis within the IS/MND and, therefore, no comment is enumerated or response required, per CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. Responses to the comments included below were prepared with the assistance from LSA biologist Kelly McDonald, as well as Cara Cunningham, an Associate/Senior Environmental Planner at LSA that specializes in air quality and energy technical analysis. Ms. McDonald is a Biologist with LSA with over 6 years of experience conducting biological surveys and monitoring throughout California and elsewhere for a variety of projects, including preconstruction nesting bird surveys and monitoring vegetation clearing/maintenance in sensitive areas. Ms. McDonald has conducted general biological assessments, special-status species surveys, focused plant and animal surveys, GPS field data collection, jurisdictional delineations, and preparation of permit applications submitted to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. She has also prepared technical biological resources studies and environmental documents pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Ms. Cunningham is an Associate/Senior Environmental Planner with over 8 years of experience. At LSA, she provides project management and technical assistance on a variety of planning and environmental documents including Environmental Assessments, Initial Studies, and Environmental Impact Reports (EIR). Ms. Cunningham has a strong foundation in land use planning and is well versed in addressing impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and energy. Ms. Cunningham is proficient in air quality models, including the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) and the Roadway Emissions Estimator Model (RoadMod). B. COMMENTS AND RESPONSES LETTER 1 Laborers' International Union of North America, Local Union 294 (LIUNA) Victoria Yundt May 26, 2023 Comment 1-1 Dear Mr. Holt and City of Fresno Planning and Development Department: I am writing on behalf of Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22- 04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22-04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 3 “Applicant”), and prepared for the Project, including all actions related or referring to the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8-acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”). LIUNA is concerned that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND” or “MND”) prepared for the Project is legally inadequate. After reviewing the MND, we conclude that it fails as an informational document, and that there is a fair argument that the Project may have adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, we request that the City of Fresno (the “City”) prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code (“PRC”) section 21000, et seq. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Project is for the construction and operation of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking. More specifically, the Project would include an 81,608 square-foot showroom, a 4,682 square-foot stockroom and attached loading zone for delivery vehicles and customer pick up in the northeast corner, as well as other features. The Project would also include 298 parking stalls, including 30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls and 36 clean air/vanpool parking stalls. The Project site is an approximately 8-acre site located in the City of Fresno with commercial and residential uses to the west. Single-family residences are located approximately 65 feet west of the Project site across North Abby Street. The Pinedale Elementary School is about 900 feet to the west of the Project site. The site is primarily vacant, with the exception of two concrete utility structures located on the southwest corner and the central portion of the project site respectively. The City prepared an initial study and mitigated negative declaration for the proposed Project, which found that the Project would have no potentially significant impacts. However, as discussed below, the Project may have significant biological resources, energy, air quality, and health risk impacts requiring that the City prepare an EIR. Response 1-1 This comment provides an introduction to the comment letter and describes the proposed Project, and does not provide specific comments on the adequacy of the analysis included in the IS/MND. No further response is necessary. Comment 1-2 LEGAL STANDARD As the California Supreme Court has held, “[i]f no EIR has been prepared for a nonexempt project, but substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may result in significant adverse impacts, the proper remedy is to order preparation of an EIR.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310, 319-320 (CBE v. SCAQMD) 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 4 (citing No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75, 88; Brentwood Assn. for No Drilling, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 491, 504–505).) “Significant environmental effect” is defined very broadly as “a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment.” (Pub. Res. Code (“PRC”) § 21068; see also 14 CCR § 15382.) An effect on the environment need not be “momentous” to meet the CEQA test for significance; it is enough that the impacts are “not trivial.” (No Oil, Inc., 13 Cal.3d at 83.) “The ‘foremost principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109 (CBE v. CRA).) The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1214 (Bakersfield Citizens); Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 927.) The EIR is an “environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached the ecological points of no return.” (Bakersfield Citizens, 124 Cal.App.4th at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a “document of accountability,” intended to “demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action.” (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process “protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) An EIR is required if “there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC § 21080(d); see also Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) In very limited circumstances, an agency may avoid preparing an EIR by issuing a negative declaration, a written statement briefly indicating that a project will have no significant impact thus requiring no EIR (14 CCR § 15371), only if there is not even a “fair argument” that the project will have a significant environmental effect. (PRC §§ 21100, 21064.) Since “[t]he adoption of a negative declaration . . . has a terminal effect on the environmental review process,” by allowing the agency “to dispense with the duty [to prepare an EIR],” negative declarations are allowed only in cases where “the proposed project will not affect the environment at all.” (Citizens of Lake Murray v. San Diego (1989) 129 Cal.App.3d 436, 440.) Where an initial study shows that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, a mitigated negative declaration may be appropriate. However, a mitigated negative declaration is proper only if the project revisions would avoid or mitigate the potentially significant effects identified in the initial study “to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and…there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC §§ 21064.5, 21080(c)(2); Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 331.) In that context, “may” means a reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment. (PRC §§ 21082.2(a), 21100, 21151(a); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927; League for Protection of Oakland’s etc. Historic Res. v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 904–05.) Under the “fair argument” standard, an EIR is required if any substantial evidence in the record indicates that a project may have an adverse environmental effect—even if contrary evidence exists to support the agency’s decision. (14 CCR § 15064(f)(1); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 931; 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 5 Stanislaus Audubon Society v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 150-51; Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602.) The “fair argument” standard creates a “low threshold” favoring environmental review through an EIR rather than through issuance of negative declarations or notices of exemption from CEQA. (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928.) The “fair argument” standard is virtually the opposite of the typical deferential standard accorded to agencies. As a leading CEQA treatise explains: This ‘fair argument’ standard is very different from the standard normally followed by public agencies in their decision making. Ordinarily, public agencies weigh the evidence in the record and reach a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. [Citation]. The fair argument standard, by contrast, prevents the lead agency from weighing competing evidence to determine who has a better argument concerning the likelihood or extent of a potential environmental impact. (Kostka & Zishcke, Practice Under the California Environmental Quality Act, §6.37 (2d ed. Cal. CEB 2021).) The Courts have explained that “it is a question of law, not fact, whether a fair argument exists, and the courts owe no deference to the lead agency’s determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928 (emphasis in original).) For over forty years the courts have consistently held that an accurate and stable project description is a bedrock requirement of CEQA—the sine qua non (that without which there is nothing) of an adequate CEQA document: Only through an accurate view of the project may affected outsiders and public decision-makers balance the proposal’s benefit against its environmental cost, consider mitigation measures, assess the advantage of terminating the proposal (i.e., the “no project” alternative) and weigh other alternatives in the balance. An accurate, stable and finite project description is the sine qua non of an informative and legally sufficient EIR. (County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 185 at 192–93.) CEQA therefore requires that an environmental review document provide an adequate description of the project to allow for the public and government agencies to participate in the review process through submitting public comments and making informed decisions. Lastly, CEQA requires that an environmental document include a description of the project’s environmental setting or “baseline.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15063(d)(2).) The CEQA “baseline” is the set of environmental conditions against which to compare a project’s anticipated impacts. (CBE v. SCAQMD, 48 Cal.4th at 321.) CEQA Guidelines section 15125(a) states, in pertinent part, that a lead agency’s environmental review under CEQA: …must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as they exist at the time [environmental analysis] is commenced, from both a local and 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 6 regional perspective. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a Lead Agency determines whether an impact is significant. (See Save Our Peninsula Committee v. County of Monterey (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 124-25 (“Save Our Peninsula”).) As the court of appeal has explained, “the impacts of the project must be measured against the ‘real conditions on the ground,’” and not against hypothetical permitted levels. (Id. at 121-23.) Response 1-2 The comment cites CEQA case law, and articles from the Public Resources Code and the California Code of Regulations to provide context for the "fair argument" standard, define what consists of a significant environmental effect under CEQA, and establish the conditions under which the use of a MND or an EIR is justified. The comment does not provide specific comments on the adequacy of the analysis included in the IS/MND. No further response is necessary. Comment 1-3 DISCUSSION I. The Project May Result in Significant Impacts to Biological Resources. A. The IS/MND inadequately characterized the existing environmental setting as it relates to wildlife. The IS/MND’s baseline for biological impacts is inadequate, incomplete, and understates the biological values at the Project site. According to the IS/MND and the Biological Resources Assessment, included as Appendix B to the IS/MND, “a general biological survey of the project site was conducted by an LSA Biologist on January 19, 2023.” (IS/MND, p. 37; IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 3.) In addition, “[a] literature review and records search was conducted on January 18, 2023, to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special status plant and animal species in the project vicinity.” (IS/MND, p. 36.) The IS/MND reports “no special-status species hav[ing] been identified within the project site or in the vicinity of the site.” (Id., p. 38.) As a result, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he project site does not contain critical habitat that could support candidate, sensitive or special-status species.” (Id.) However, based on the literature review and the observations made during the January 2023 biological survey of the Project site, special-status bird species could be present and/or use the site for nesting, breeding, and/or foraging. The IS/MND reports that during the LSA biologist’s field survey of the Project site, the following species were observed: A total of seven wildlife species were observed on or near the project site during the January 2023 survey, including: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris; nonnative species), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 7 (Id., p. 37.) Regarding the observation of California ground squirrels on the Project site, the IS/MND states: While no special-status animal species (or signs of such species) were observed on site during the January 2023 survey, California ground squirrel burrows that could be used by burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) were observed in portions of the project site. None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey, although there is some potential for use by this species in the future. Potentially significant direct and/or indirect impacts, including mortality, harassment, or other forms of incidental take, could occur if construction-related ground disturbance occurs in or around an occupied burrow. (Id.) The occurrence of California ground squirrels is also significant because ground squirrels are prey of large raptors such as bald eagle, golden eagle, ferruginous hawk and Swainson’s hawk. Due to the presence of ground squirrels on the Project site, protocol-level surveys should have been performed for burrowing owls and nesting birds and raptors, such as the Swainson’s hawk. Instead, only a single reconnaissance-level survey was conducted on January 19, 2023. This survey was inadequate for several reasons. First, the January 2023 field survey of the Project site does not provide substantial evidence of the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. The lack of evidence of burrowing owls on the Project site was not necessarily because they were not there, but because the survey was not conducted during the breeding season when the owls may be present and did not adhere to the survey protocols for burrowing owls prepared by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”). According to CDFW: Burrowing owls are more detectable during the breeding season with detection probabilities being highest during the nestling stage (Conway et al. 2008). In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from 1 February to 31 August (Haug et al. 1993, Thompsen 1971) with some variances by geographic location and climatic conditions. Several researchers suggest three or more survey visits during daylight hours (Haug and Diduik 1993, CBOC 1997, Conway and Simon 2003) and recommend each visit occur at least three weeks apart during the peak of the breeding season, commonly accepted in California as between 15 April and 15 July (CBOC 1997). Conway and Simon (2003) and Conway et al. (2008) recommended conducting surveys during the day when most burrowing owls in a local area are in the laying and incubation period (so as not to miss early breeding attempts), during the nesting period, and in the late nestling period when most owls are spending time above ground. Non-breeding season (1 September to 31 January) surveys may provide information on burrowing owl occupancy, but do not substitute for breeding season surveys because results are typically inconclusive. Burrowing owls are more difficult to detect during the non-breeding season and their seasonal residency status is difficult to ascertain. (Cal. Dep’t Fish & Wildlife, Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Mar. 7, 2012), p. 6, at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83843 (emphasis added).) However, the biological survey of the Project site took place on January 19, 2023, which is outside of the breeding 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 8 season for burrowing owls, as identified above by the CDFW. No survey was taken during the burrowing owl breeding season. The single survey that was conducted is also inconsistent with the surveys recommended in the CDFW’s available survey guidelines for burrowing owls. (See, e.g., p. 28.) For example, detection surveys are needed for burrowing owls present on and in the vicinity of the Project site that are consistent with the recommendations of CDFW. An EIR should be prepared along with a report of appropriate detection surveys. Thus, given the paucity of owls present in Fresno and the importance of that county to the breeding success of the species, the Project’s baseline must be informed by protocol-level surveys that can determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls at the site. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on that species of concern. The same baseline problem also afflicts the IS/MND’s discussion of other nesting bird species of concern on or in the vicinity of the Project site, such as the Swainson’s hawk. According to the IS/MND’s Biological Resources Assessment: The project site contains marginal foraging habitat for certain raptors such as the Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), although suitable tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent from the project site. . . . Mature Palm and oak trees in the vicinity and along the perimeter outside of the site in the adjacent parcels could be used by raptors and other tree-nesting species. Overall, the project site and immediate surroundings contain foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species that are protected while nesting under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. (IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 7.) Because of the absence of detection surveys, the IS/MND only speculates that habitat is marginal and occurrence likelihoods low. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on nesting raptors and other bird species of concern. As multiple courts have explained: The agency [will] not be allowed to hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data.... CEQA places the burden of environmental investigation on government rather than the public. If the local agency has failed to study an area of possible environmental impact, a fair argument may be based on the limited facts in the record. Deficiencies in the record may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences.” (Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 311; see also Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1378–79; Christward Ministry v. Superior Court (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 180, 197, 228 Cal.Rptr. 868 [fact that initial study checklist was incomplete and marked every impact “no” supported fair argument that project would have significant environmental effects].) Accordingly, a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR for the Project because of the lack of relevant investigation of the site’s biological resources and the possible use of the site by sensitive wildlife species. Response 1-3 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 9 This comment claims that the IS/MND inadequately characterized the existing environmental setting as it relates to wildlife, and that the proposed Project needs to prepare an EIR based on the lack of investigation of the Project site’s biological resources, and the possible use of the project site by sensitive wildlife species. The existing environmental setting was described accurately at the time of the field survey. The Biological Resources Assessment (included as Appendix B of the IS/MND) stated that the project site was previously developed as Boomers Park (a family entertainment park) from approximately 1998 to 2017. In 2017, Boomers Park was demolished/cleared and the project site has remained in its current condition since 2017. Adjacent parcels consist of North Abby Street to the west, a Kohl’s department store to the north, State Route (SR 41) to the east, and a Home Depot store to the south. Some lands in the vicinity of the project site are fallow/vacant lots; however, most of the lands are developed with a mixture of commercial developments, schools, and residential uses. There are no undisturbed open spaces in the vicinity of the project site. Because the project site is surrounded by development and is isolated from open spaces, the site lacks adjacent foraging habitat needed for burrowing owl, therefore limiting the habitat suitability. In addition, soil and vegetation within the project site is disturbed from the demolition of Boomers Park in 2017. Worn foot paths, litter, vehicle tracks, and trampling are evident throughout the project site, making the project site less likely for burrowing owls to utilize. Furthermore, as stated in the IS/MND and Biological Resources Assessment, the perimeter of the project site contains palm and oak trees that could be utilized by nesting raptor species. The palm and oak trees provide suitable perching locations for raptor species, thereby making the site less suitable for burrowing owl. Lastly, CNDDB and eBird records of burrowing owl were also checked to inform the survey and habitat suitability. No records of burrowing owl have been documented within the project site or the immediate surroundings. There is only one CNDDB record within a 5-mile vicinity of the project site. The CNDDB record is located 4.91 miles to the southeast, and was recorded in 1990. Multiple eBird records have documented burrowing owl north of the site in 2020 in areas that contain larger contiguous habitat. Therefore, the impact assessment related to burrowing owl accurately describes the baseline conditions of the project site and reflects the lack of suitable habitat conditions needed for this species. Protocol level surveys are not warranted given the conditions described above. Similarly, the rationale regarding the site conditions documented and described above is applicable to Swainson’s hawk. Tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent within the project site because the trees present are immature and small in stature and do not provide conducive nesting habitat for Swainson’s hawk or other raptor species. Although the perimeter of the project site contains suitable nesting habitat, no inactive stick nests (i.e. traditional nest territories) were observed during the survey, thereby reducing the 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 10 likelihood of Swainson’s hawk nesting along the perimeter of the project site. Additionally, there is only one CNDDB record of Swainson’s hawk within a 5-mile vicinity of the project site from 1956. Multiple eBird records have documented Swainson’s hawk north of the project site from 2022 in areas that contain more suitable habitat consistent with the biology of this species and within their known nesting territories. There are no known or documented nests within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. Therefore, the baseline conditions of the project site accurately reflect that the foraging habitat is marginal and nesting is not expected for Swainson’s hawk. Protocol level surveys are not warranted given the conditions described above. Comment 1-4 B. The pre-construction surveys identified in the IS/MND for burrowing owls and nesting birds are not sufficient to address potential impacts to birds that may be present at the Project site. After reviewing the proposed wildlife impact mitigations identified in the IS/MND related to pre- construction surveys for burrowing owl surveys (i.e., Mitigation Measure BIO-1), and nesting birds (i.e., Mitigation Measure BIO-2), we agree with the need for such preconstruction surveys. However, these recommended burrowing owl surveys and preconstruction surveys will come too late either to disclose the Project’s anticipated impacts or to fully mitigate impacts to birds, including burrowing owls and nesting raptors. Instead, detection surveys need to be performed to professional standards and that information used to disclose potential impacts and to inform the pre-construction surveys. Detection surveys are needed, because detection surveys provide the bases for impact assessments and formulation of mitigation measures. They also inform pre-construction surveys, which are otherwise performed in a rushed manner just ahead of construction. By failing to determine the actual baseline of burrowing owls and other nesting-bird species’ reliance on the site for roosting, nesting, and foraging, and instead waiting until five to thirty days before construction to determine what roosts, nests, and birds may suffer impacts from the Project, the IS/MND fails to evaluate and mitigate the Project’s potential significant impacts to special-status bird species. Response 1-4 This comment claims that the mitigation measures included in the IS/MND do not sufficiently address potential impacts to birds that may be present at the project site. The mitigation measures outlining the pre-construction surveys adequately address and avoid potential adverse impacts to these species and would mitigate for any potential impacts if the species were found within the project site. Furthermore, the pre-construction measure and timing for the burrowing owl survey is a standard timeline that is recognized by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and is the described in the CDFW Burrowing Owl Survey and Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines: “A preconstruction survey may be required by project-specific mitigations and should be conducted no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbing activity”. Additionally, the measure states if burrowing owls are present, specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW, which would avoid or mitigate impacts to this species. 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 11 Swainson’s hawk are not expected to nest within the project site given tree nesting habitat is absent and no inactive sticks nests were observed along the perimeter. Additionally, there are no known or documented nesting records of Swainson’s hawk within the 0.5-mile radius of the project site. Therefore, preconstruction surveys would avoid and mitigate impacts to Swainson’s hawk and other nesting birds. Comment 1-5 II. The IS/MND’s Analysis of Energy Impacts is Conclusory and Fails to Provide Substantial Evidence that the Project’s Energy Impacts are Less than Significant. Contrary to the IS/MND, the construction and operation of the Project could potentially cause wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 46- 49.) The IS/MND states that “[t]he proposed project would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and gasoline.” (Id., p. 46.) However, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to energy, and no mitigation is required.” (Id., p. 49.) Regarding the Project’s construction-related gasoline impacts, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts will be less than significant, stating: Petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less- than-significant impact during project construction. (Id., p. 46.) Turning to the Project’s operational energy use, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts to natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel use for vehicle and truck trips associated with Project operation will be less than significant because: • [E]lectricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total electricity demand. (Id., p. 47.) • [N]atural gas demand associated with the proposed project would only be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total natural gas demand. (Id., pp. 47- 48.) • [V]ehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and by less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage. (Id., pp. 47-48.) 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 12 In addition to the IS/MND’s general estimates regarding the Project’s construction and operational- related natural gas, electricity, and fuel use, above, the IS/MND also bases its less than significant construction and operational energy use conclusion on the following: [The] proposed new development would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). The expected energy consumption during construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent with typical usage rates for commercial uses; however, energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings. (Id., p. 48.) Lastly, concerning whether or not the Project would “[c]onflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency,” the IS/MND concludes: The proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact to regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with California’s energy conservation plans as described in the [California Energy Commission’s] Integrated Energy Policy Reports. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (IS/MND, p. 49.) The standard under CEQA is whether the Project would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Failing to undertake “an investigation into renewable energy options that might be available or appropriate for a project” violates CEQA. (California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 213; see also, League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer (“League to Save Lake Tahoe”) (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 164-168.) Energy conservation under CEQA is defined as the “wise and efficient use of energy.” (CEQA Guidelines, app. F, § I.) The “wise and efficient use of energy” is achieved by “(1) decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, (2) decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil, and (3) increasing reliance on renewable energy resources.” (Id.) Noting compliance with the California Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit 20, §§ 1601–1608 (Title 20)) does not constitute an adequate analysis of energy. (Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 256, 264-65.) Similarly, the court in City of Woodland held unlawful an energy analysis that relied on compliance with California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 24, part 6 (Title 24)), that failed to assess transportation energy impacts, and that failed to address renewable energy impacts. (25 Cal.App.4th at pp. 209-13.) As 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 13 such, the IS/MND’s reliance on Title 20’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations does not satisfy the requirements for an adequate discussion of the Project’s energy impacts. The IS/MND summarily concludes that the Project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. There is no discussion of the Project’s cost effectiveness in terms of energy requirements. There is no adequate discussion of energy consuming equipment and processes that will be used during the construction or operation of the Project, including, inter alia, the energy necessary for heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; and indoor, outdoor, and perimeter lighting. The Project’s energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for building maintenance was also not identified. The IS/MND attempts to satisfy the analysis of energy impacts by estimating the Project’s percentage of energy use compared to energy and fuel use for the entirety of Fresno County. CEQA prohibits this type of “drop in the bucket” analysis. (See Kings Cnty. Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 718; Friends of Oroville v. City of Oroville (2013) 219 Cal. App. 4th 83, 842.) In addition, the effect of the Project on peak and base period demands for electricity has not been addressed. This is of particular concern given recent events where California’s electric grid was significantly impacted by an unprecedented high energy demand as a result of a prolonged, record- breaking heat wave that affected the entire State of California for multiple days. For example, at the start of September 2022, California experienced extreme heat, with temperatures across the state 10 to 20 degrees hotter than normal, driving up energy demand and straining power generation equipment as people ran their air conditioning. On September 6, 2022, as a result of electricity supplies running low in the face of record heat and demand, the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) issued an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) 3, the highest energy alert, authorizing the grid operator to order rotating power outages to lower demand and stabilize the system if necessary. As grid conditions worsened, energy supplies were determined to be insufficient to cover demand and reserves, and an EEA 3 was declared, meaning controlled power outages were imminent or in process according to each utility’s emergency plan. The EEA 3 was in response to an evening peak electricity demand that was forecasted at more than 52,000 megawatts, which Cal-ISO stated was “a new historic all-time high for the grid, as the state endured the hottest day in this prolonged, record-breaking heat wave.” Here, the IS/MND fails to adequately analyze energy conservation. As such, the IS/MND’s conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In addition, under League to Save Lake Tahoe, the agency has to implement all feasible energy mitigation measures unless it has substantial evidence to show that the proposed measures are infeasible. (Save Lake Tahoe, 75 Cal.App.5th at 166-168; see also, id., pp. 159-163.) An example of a feasible mitigation measure, which has recently been adopted as a new ordinance in San Francisco, is the requirement that 100% of parking spaces have electric vehicle charging stations. According to the IS/MND, of the 298 parking stalls included in the Project, only “30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls” would be provided. (IS/MND, p. 3.) Since requiring all parking stalls to be EV stalls is likely feasible, the IS/MND must implement it as an energy efficient mitigation measure, or at minimum, provide substantial evidence that implementing the mitigation measure is unfeasible. As such, the IS/MND’s 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 14 conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In conclusion, because the IS/MND failed to adequately analyze and mitigate the Project’s potentially wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy, an EIR should be prepared to address the Project’s potential significant energy impacts, and to mitigate those impacts accordingly. Response 1-5 This comment claims that the IS/MND fails to provide substantial evidence that the proposed project’s energy impacts are less than significant. As discussed in Section VI, Energy, of the IS/MND, thresholds for impacts related to energy used in the analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, which state that development of a proposed project would result in a significant impact related to energy if it would: result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. This comment also claims that there is no adequate discussion of energy consuming equipment and processes that will be used during the construction or operation of the proposed project, including, the energy necessary for heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; and indoor, outdoor, and perimeter lighting. As discussed on pages 46 through 49 of the IS/MND, the proposed project would increase the demand for energy through day-to-day operations and fuel consumption associated with project construction. The IS/MND discusses energy use resulting from implementation of the proposed project and evaluates whether the proposed project would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflict with any applicable plans for renewable energy and energy efficiency. As discussed on page 46 of the IS/MND, during project construction, petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for construction activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the proposed project. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact during project construction. In addition, as discussed on pages 47 and 48 of the IS/MND, energy use consumed by the proposed project would be associated with natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel used for vehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project. Energy and natural gas consumption was estimated for the proposed project using default energy intensities by land use type in the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). As described in the 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 15 CalEEMod User’s Guide, CalEEMod utilizes widely accepted methodologies for estimating emissions combined with default data that can be used when site-specific information is not available.1,2 Sources of these methodologies and default data include, but are not limited to, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) AP-42 emission factors, California Air Resources Board (CARB) vehicle emission models, studies commissioned by California agencies such as the California Energy Commission (CEC) and CalRecycle. The User’s Guide also states that CalEEMod calculates construction and operations emissions from land use development projects which can be used to support preparation of air quality and GHG analyses in CEQA documents, including EIRs. In addition, the User’s Guide states that the emissions inventory modules also contain default values for estimating utility consumption (e.g., water, electricity, natural gas) that may be useful for preparing hydrology and energy analyses in other sections of a CEQA document. Additionally, it should also be noted that the energy use factors included in the CalEEMod model, which was used to estimate energy for the proposed project, are based on the California Energy Commission (CEC) sponsored California Commercial End Use Survey (CEUS) and Residential Appliance Saturation Survey (RASS) studies. These studies provide conservative assumptions based on actual use surveys and is the best available information for purposes of this assessment. As such, CalEEMod is appropriate for use in energy analyses. Based on the operational energy consumption estimates shown in Table 3 (included on page 47 of the IS/MND), operation of the proposed project would increase the annual electricity consumption in Fresno County by approximately 0.1 percent and increase the annual natural gas consumption in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent. Further, vehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and by less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage. Therefore, energy demand associated with the proposed project would result in a negligible increase in Fresno County. Further, the proposed project would be required to comply with the latest California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) building measures and 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 Standards). In addition, as discussed in the IS/MND, proposed new development would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). This comment also claims that the effect of the proposed project on peak and base period demands for electricity has not been addressed. As discussed on page 48 of the IS/MND, PG&E is the private utility that would supply the proposed project’s electricity and natural 1 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (May 2021). California Emissions Estimator Model User’s Guide. May. Website: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/user-guide- 2021/01_user-39-s-guide2020-4-0.pdf?sfvrsn=6 (accessed May 2023). 2 Detailed information regarding CalEEMod default assumptions can be found in the User’s Guide: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 16 gas services. PG&E plans to continue to provide reliable service to their customers and upgrade their distribution systems as necessary to meet future demand. This comment also claims that all feasible energy mitigation measures should be implemented. However, the IS/MND properly determined that the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts related to energy. As such, identification and analysis of mitigation measures is not required. The commenter has not shown substantial evidence supporting a fair argument of a potentially significant environmental impact. Comment 1-6 III. The IS/MND Fails to Adequately Evaluate and Mitigate Health Risks from Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions. One of the primary emissions of concern regarding health effects for land development projects is diesel particulate matter (“DPM”), which can be released during Project construction and operation. DPM consists of fine particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometer including a subgroup of ultrafine particles (with a diameter less than 0.1 micrometers). Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gases and cancer-causing substances. Exposure to DPM is a recognized health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who may have other serious health problems. According to the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”), DPM exposure may lead to the following adverse health effects: aggravated asthma; chronic bronchitis; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations; decreased lung function in children; lung cancer; and premature deaths for those with heart or lung disease. An EIR should be prepared to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the Project’s operational and construction-related DPM. The IS/MND incorrectly concluded that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”). (See, IS/MND, p. 32.) Given the proximity of the Project to single-family residences within 65 feet of the Project site and Pinedale Elementary School within 1,000 feet of the Project site, construction and operational HRAs need to be prepared to determine the potential significant health risk impacts to families, students, and teachers from DPM emissions related to the Project. As such, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for two reasons. First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. The IS/MND’s conclusion is also inconsistent with the most recent guidance published by the Office of Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”). (See, “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.) Second, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the excess health risk impact of the Project to the 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 17 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (“SJVAPCD”) specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million. Without conducting a quantified construction and operational HRA, the IS/MND also fails to evaluate the cumulative lifetime cancer risk to nearby, existing receptors from the Project’s construction and operation together. This is incorrect, and as a result, the IS/MND’s evaluation cannot be relied upon to determine Project significance. OEHHA guidance requires that the excess cancer risk be calculated separately for all sensitive receptor age bins, then summed to evaluate the total cancer risk posed by all Project activities. Therefore, in accordance with the most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted. Lastly, the IS/MND relies on inadequate mitigation (i.e., Mitigation Measure Air-1) to support its conclusion that the Project will result in less-than-significant health risk impacts from construction- related emissions. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 32-33.) Mitigation Measure Air-1 only requires certain controls consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) to be included as specifications for the Project and implemented at the construction site. (Id.) The IS/MND should also require construction equipment used at the Project site to meet Tier 4 Final emissions standards to reduce construction-related emissions as well as the adverse health risk impacts of those emissions on nearby sensitive receptors. Response 1-6 This comment states that the IS/MND failed to provide a construction or operational HRA. The SJVAPCD’s Update to the District’s Risk Management Policy to Address the OEHHA Revised Risk Assessment Guidance Document states that emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) are considered significant if an HRA shows an increased risk of greater than 20 in 1 million. The OEHHA Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines3 has determined that long-term exposure to diesel exhaust particulates poses the highest cancer risk of any TAC it has evaluated. In addition, CARB has also identified DPM emitted by off- road, diesel-fueled engines emit DPM as a TAC.4 As such, the TAC of concern would be DPM associated with the use of diesel engines during project construction and operation. For risk assessment procedures, the OEHHA specifies that the surrogate for whole diesel exhaust is DPM. HRA analyses typically use PM10 emissions to represent DPM emissions, consistent with OEHHA guidance. As shown in Table 1 of the IS/MND, PM10 emissions, which are a surrogate for TAC emissions during construction, would be 0.2 tons per year, which is well below the SJVAPCD threshold of 15.0 tons per year, indicating that significant mass emissions of PM10 would not occur and a significant health risk would also not occur. Additionally, as shown in Table B of the IS/MND, once operational, the proposed project would result in PM10 emissions of 0.1 tons per year, which is also well below the SJVAPCD 3 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. March. Website: https://oehha ca.gov/air/air-toxics-hot-spots (accessed June 2023). 4 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022. Proposed Amendments to the In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. November 17. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/board/ res/2022/res22-19.pdf (accessed April 2023). 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 18 threshold of 15.0 tons per year, indicating that significant mass emissions of PM10 would not occur and a significant health risk would also not occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels of TACs. Comment 1-7 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, LIUNA requests that an EIR be prepared for the Project and that it be circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Response 1-7 This comment provides a conclusion to the arguments raised in the comment letter and generally states the commenter's opinion that the IS/MND is flawed and inadequate and that preparation of an EIR is required to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. This comment does not provide specific comments on the adequacy of the analysis included in the IS/MND. No further response is necessary. 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 19 ATTACHMENT PUBLIC COMMENT LETTER 6/15/23 (P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\RTC\Draft\Living_Spaces_RTC_Memo-Draft.docx) 20 This page intentionally left blank Exhibit E Planning & Development Department Development Services Division 2600 Fresno Street, Third Floor, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721-3604 Operational Statement Form Please use this form to clearly explain the proposed project. This information will assist all individuals, departments and agencies in their review and drafting of comments, conditions, suggestions or recommendations. The goal is to facilitate an accurate and complete description of your project in order to avoid unnecessary del ays in gathering additional information. If you have any questions about the requested information, please call Development Services at (559) 621-8277. Note: If the Operational Statement is not submitted or if the submittal is illegible, unclear or incomplete, the review of your project will not be accepted for processing. Project Description: is being submitted by of on behalf of and pertains to acres of property located at APN: and is zoned with a planned land use of The applicant is requesting authorization to: The proposed development will consist of The existing site currently consists of with existing parking spaces. The proposed hours of operation are from to on Other facts pertinent to this project are as follows: 1. Project Narrative: (communicate in detail all characteristics of your p roject; provide as much detail as possible; include basic information such as applicant/project name, business, product or service, anticipated traffic- customers, deliveries, etc., any special events, number of employees, required equipment, on -site storage, demolition or adaptive reuse of existing structures, noise generation, any hazardous materials, etc.) LIVINGSPACES.COM PO BOX 2309 Buena Park, CA 90621 Cit of Fresno Planning and Development Department Development Services Division 2600 Fresno St., Third Floor, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 RE: Development Application Review, Living Spaces Furniture – 7354 North Abby St. To Whom It May Concern: Living Spaces Furniture is pleased to submit a Development Application for a new ground-up project for an approximate 105,000 SF furniture showroom in the city of Fresno. Living Spaces Furniture is a rapidly growing retail furniture company founded in 2003 in Southern California and currently operates thirty stores, including five distribution centers, located in major metro areas in California, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas. Building Layout and Use. The building will include a retail furniture showroom, small café serving prepackaged meals and offering beer and wine to approximately 30 – 40 guests (we will apply for a Type 41 ABC license), a kids room providing entertainment such as movies, video games and a play structure, a receiving/storage area, small kitchen, and employee areas. The entrance to the building is on the west elevation. The loading dock and customer pick up (CPU) will be located on the northeast corner of the building. An enclosure will house a back-up generator, electrical equipment, and dumpsters at the northeast elevation. Employees. The furniture store will employ approximately 70 to 100 full-time and part-time employees. Approximately 40 employees will be on the site during a typical business day and 55 employees during peak hours of operation. Hours of Operation. The hours of operation are 10 am to 9 pm Monday through Friday and 9 am to 9 pm on Saturdays and Sundays. The café is open from 12 pm to 8 pm daily. Living Spaces is closed Easter, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Peak periods are on the weekends between noon and 6 pm and during holidays (Black Friday, Memorial Day, etc.). LIVINGSPACES.COM Store Deliveries. Each day, the store will receive deliveries of furniture from either or Rialto, CA or Fremont, CA Distribution Center. All deliveries will be made at the loading area located on the northeast corner of the building. Approximately two to three daily deliveries of inventory will be made using 26-foot box trucks and, occasionally, a 53-foot trailer. These deliveries occur in the early morning before business hours. Food service deliveries occur 1-2 times weekly, prior to business opening as well. Customer Furniture Deliveries and Customer Pick-Up (CPU). Customers will have the option to pick up furniture from the store or have furniture delivered to their home or business. Customers electing to pick up their furniture from the store will do so at the CPU area on the northeast side of the building. At the CPU area, customers park their vehicles in a designated parking stall adjacent to the receiving area and furniture will be loaded into their vehicle. CPU hours are 12 noon to 9 pm daily. Approximately 15 customer pick-ups would occur on weekdays and 40 pick-ups on weekends. We look forward to working with the City of Fresno on this project. Please don’t hesitate to contact me for any clarifications or additional information at brian.saltikov@livinspaces.com, or 714.713.9931. Sincerely, Brian Saltikov Senior Project Manager Real Estate Development Living Spaces CIRRIRRIRRIRRIRRSTOPLLSTOPUUPIVNO PANHANDLINGRIGHT TURN ONLYCB@TCTC 347.22 @CLDRAIN INLETRIM 342.96INV. 8" 339.77(SW)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 10" 339.60(SW)INV. 8" 339.60(N)INV. 8" 339.60(NE)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 8" 339.98(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 344.75INV. 24" 337.23(NW)INV. 10" 337.23(NE)INV. 24" 337.23(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.10INV. 8" 340.20(S DRY)DRAIN INLETRIM 346.22INV. 10" 338.89(NE)INV. 10" 338.89(SW)348.43CONC348.70CONC348.73CONCDRAIN INLETRIM 345.87INV. 12" 342.01(N)INV. 6" 342.11(E)346.95CONC346.84CONCCATCH BASINTC 346.44 @CL346.33CONC150111510115102151031510415106151071510815110DSSN ABBY STREET(LOCAL)PROPOSEDLIVING SPACESAPN: 30320127W MINARETS AVE(LOCAL)E ALLUVIAL AVE(COLLECTOR)KOHL'SAPN: 30320126THE HOME DEPOTAPN: 30317081 LEGEND OF PROPOSED SITE FEATURES:0204080SCALE: 1" = 40'odellengineering.com1165 Scenic Drive, Suite AModesto, CA 95350LIVING SPACES 7354 N. ABBY STREET PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS FRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSITE PLAN1’PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL NOTESCONTACT INFORMATIONSITE PLAN NOTESGENERAL NOTES IRRLLS S PLANT LEGEND MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET L2SURFACE PARKING AREA SHADE REQUIREMENTS NORTH ABBY STREETodellengineering.com 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350 LIVING SPACES7354 N. ABBY STREETPRELIMINARY PLANSFRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what's below. before you dig.Call R 2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 0 10 20 40 20' 1 348.43 CONC 348.70 CONC 348.73 CONC D S SCALE: 1" = 0 10 20 40 20'MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET L1LIVING SPACES BUILDING IRRIGATED LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY TABLE WATER BUDGET CALCULATIONS MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE MAWA TOTAL= ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE ETWU TOTAL= HYDROZONE INFORMATION TABLE LANDSCAPE AREAS SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS odellengineering.com 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350 LIVING SPACES7354 N. ABBY STREETPRELIMINARY PLANSFRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what's below. before you dig.Call R 2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 2 Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 2Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 FLOOR PLAN032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" CRCR CR SSSSCAFECOW SHELF EXIT240 36" EXIT240 36" EXIT963 195" EXIT240 36" Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 3Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 ELEVATIONS032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" 5 7 6 6 67 75 51171 23 4 6 4 61 12 N F F F FF FN NAAFCJ AA G INF M FA DAG H G BH GB +32-6” +34-6” +34-6” +32-6”+34-6”+33-6” +26-0” +75-0” +75-0” +34-6” +42-0” +22-0”+22-0” +22-0” +13-0” T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT T.O. OPENINGT.O. OPENING T.O. OPENING B.O. CANOPY A CONCRETE PANEL F ALUMINUM STOREFRONT: ARCADIA-AB8 "BLACK"K METAL ROLL-UP DOOR 1 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7015 "REPOSE GRAY"6 GLASS: VISION B REVEAL G STONE VENEER (CORONADO-8" CLASSIC JERUSALEM "SILVER ASH")L LIGHT FIXTURE 2 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7020 "BLACK FOX"7 GLASS: REEDED C STUCCO H TENANT SIGNAGE (REFER TO SIGNAGE PACKAGE)M METAL COLUMN 3 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7017 "DORIAN GRAY" D DOOR I MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR: HUNTER DOUGLAS-8461 "REGATTA TEAK"N METAL CANOPY 4 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7019 "GAUNTLET GRAY" E TENANT SIGNAGE J METAL PANEL: (REYNOBOND ACM "PEWTER")5 METAL COLOR: MAPES-AB13 "EXTRA DARK BRONZE" MATERIALS FINISHES NOTE: 1. SIGNAGE IS CONCEPTUAL AND WILL BE UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. 2. RTU WILL BE SCREENED BY PARAPETS WEST ELEVATION (FRONT) SOUTH ELEVATION (RIGHT) 1 2 N. ABBEY AVE.E. ALLUVIA L A V E .HIGHWAY 41KEY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) 2 1 Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 4Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 ELEVATIONS032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" 5 6 7 5 2 2 31 3 61 NLK F F N A A AD A G FAG G BH G H GB +75-0” +75-0” C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT +32-6” +15-0” +34-6” +34-6” +42-0” +32-6”+33-6” T.O. PARAPET T.O. SCREEN WALL T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET A CONCRETE PANEL F ALUMINUM STOREFRONT: ARCADIA-AB8 "BLACK"K METAL ROLL-UP DOOR 1 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7015 "REPOSE GRAY"6 GLASS: VISION B REVEAL G STONE VENEER (CORONADO-8" CLASSIC JERUSALEM "SILVER ASH")L LIGHT FIXTURE 2 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7020 "BLACK FOX"7 GLASS: REEDED C STUCCO H TENANT SIGNAGE (REFER TO SIGNAGE PACKAGE)M METAL COLUMN 3 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7017 "DORIAN GRAY" D DOOR I MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR: HUNTER DOUGLAS-8461 "REGATTA TEAK"N METAL CANOPY 4 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7019 "GAUNTLET GRAY" E TENANT SIGNAGE J METAL PANEL: (REYNOBOND ACM "PEWTER")5 METAL COLOR: MAPES-AB13 "EXTRA DARK BRONZE" MATERIALS FINISHES NOTE: 1. SIGNAGE IS CONCEPTUAL AND WILL BE UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. 2. RTU WILL BE SCREENED BY PARAPETS EAST ELEVATION (REAR) NORTH ELEVATION (LEFT) 3 4 N. ABBEY AVE.E. ALLUVIA L A V E .HIGHWAY 41KEY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) 4 3 Exhibit F FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE FINDINGS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS Section 15-5206 of the Fresno Municipal Code provides that the Director or Planning Commission may only approve a Development Permit application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this article and with the following: Findings per Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-5206 The Director or Planning Commission may only approve a Development Permit application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this article and with the following : Finding a: The applicable standards and requirements of this Code. a. The proposed structure and use is permitted in the CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district and is subject to the development standards of said zone district pursuant to Chapter 15, Article 12 of the FMC. Given the conditions of approval, the project will comply with all applicable standards and requirements of the Code. Finding b: The General Plan and any operative plan or policies the City has adopted. b. The Fresno General Plan designates the subject site for Commercial – Regional planned land uses and provides objectives to guide in the development of these projects. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 meets all policies and objectives of the Fresno General Plan. The following are excerpts of such objectives. Objective: LU-6: Retain and enhance existing commercial areas to strengthen Fresno’s economic base and site new office, retail, and lodging use districts to serve neighborhoods and regional visitors. Implementing Policies: LU-6-a: Foster high quality design, diversity, and a mix of amenities in new development with uses through the consideration of guidelines, consistent with the Urban Form policies of this Plan. LU-6-e: Promote economic growth with regional commercial centers. The proposed development will enhance the existing surrounding commercial areas that will continue to strengthen Fresno’s economic base. In addition, the new commercial building façade complies with the FMC and provides a high-quality design. The subject property is adjacent to an existing shopping center to the south and will connect to the adjacent developed commercial property to the north providing an extension of an existing regional commercial center. Finding c: Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council. c. The proposed structure and site layout is consistent with the site design and façade design development standards provided in the CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district, and the design guidelines adopted in the Fresno General Plan. Finding d: Any approved Tentative Map, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required. d. All special conditions required for the proposed project have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval which shall be met prior to issuance of building permits/occupancy. Furthermore, the applicant is required to submit corrected exhibits, inclusive of all conditions of approval which will ensure that all requirements are met. Finding e: Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5 e. The project is located in the Traffic Pattern Zone 7 and the 60 CNEL no ise contour. An airport disclosure notice is required as conditioned. The project as proposed complies with the Safety Criteria Matrix of the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Based upon the plans and information submitted by the applicant and the recommended conditions of project approval, staff has determined that all of the findings above can be made. Exhibit G Public Notice Hearing Radius Map Legend Subject Property Noticing Boundary CITY OF FRESNO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 AND RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fresno City Planning Commission, in accordance with Sections 65090 and 65091 (Planning and Zoning Law) of the Government Code and in accordance with the procedures of Article 50, Chapter 15, of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC), will conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal of the items below, filed by Living Spaces pertaining to approximately 8 acres of property located at 7354 North Abby Street, on the east side of North Abby Street between East Minarets/East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues: 1. Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122: A Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122: A request for authorization to construct an approximately 104,867 sq. ft. furniture showroom. Any interested person may also participate electronically during the public hearing to speak in favor or against the project proposal, by either Zoom meeting or telephone with instructions provided on the Planning Commission Agenda, and present written testimony at least 24 hours in advance, via an eComment or by email to PublicCommentsPlanning@fresno.gov (cc Robert.Holt@fresno.gov). All documents submitted to the Planning Commission for its consideration prior to or at the hearing shall be submitted to the Planning Commission at least 24 hours prior to the Commission agenda item being heard, pursuant to the Planning Commission rules and procedures, or they may be excluded from the administrative record of proceedings. If you challenge the above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues, you, or someone else, raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Development Services Division of the Planning and Development Department and/or Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing . The Planning Commission action on the proposed Development Permit will be final unless appealed to the City Council. The Environmental Assessment will be reviewed by the City Council. NOTE: This public hearing notice is being sent to surrounding property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site pursuant to the requirements of FMC Section 15-5007. All documents related to this project are available for public review at the Planning and Development Department at the address listed below or electronic copies may be requested by contacting the Planner at the number listed below. Documents are available for viewing at City Hall during normal business hours (Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.) by appointment only. Please contact the Planner listed below via e-mail or by phone to request electronic copies or schedule an appointment to view documents. For additional information, contact Rob Holt, Planning and Development Department, by telephone at (559) 621-8056, or via e-mail at Robert.Holt@fresno.gov. Si necesita información en Español, comuníquese con Jose Valenzuela al teléfono (559) 621-8070. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, HDFP, Director Dated: September 8, 2023 Assessor’s Parcel No(s). 303-201-27 SEE MAP ON REVERSE SIDE Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 · Fresno, CA 93721 · Phone (559) 621-8277 FRESNO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Date/Time: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. or thereafter Place: City Hall Council Chamber, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721; or, watch the live broadcast via the Zoom link located on the Planning Commission agenda found here: https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx Rob Holt PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2600 FRESNO STREET, ROOM 3043 FRESNO, CA 93721 THIS IS A LEGAL NOTICE REGARDING 7354 N Abby St P22-04122 VICINITY MAP Project Area E MINARETS/E ALLUVIAL AVE Exhibit H 2600 Fresno Street, Third Floor Planning and Development Department Fresno, California 93721-3604 Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, Director (559) 621-8277 FAX (559) 498-1026 July 24, 2023 Please reply to: Rob Holt Robert.Holt@fresno.gov Brian Saltikov Living Spaces brian.saltikov@livingspaces.com (Sent via email only) SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH ABBY STREET, SOUTH OF EAST MINARETS AVENUE (APN: 303-201-27) On July 24, 2023, the Planning and Development Department Director approved Development Permit Application No. P22-04122. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 authorizes the construction of an approximately 104,867 sq. ft. furniture showroom including a new parking lot, landscaping, and a solid waste enclosure. The project is located in the CR/UGM/cz (Commercial – Regional/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning) zone district. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed on May 5, 2023. The approval of this project is subject to compliance with the following Conditions of Approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PART A – ITEMS TO BE COMPLETED The following items are required prior to issuance of building permits or certificate of occupancy: Planner to check when completed ☐ 1. Development and/or operations shall take place in accordance with Exhibits A, O, L-1, L-2, F, E-1 and E-2 dated November 22, 2022; and Exhibit A (redlined site plan from Traffic Planning) dated December 21, 2022. Revise and transfer all comments or corrections to plan exhibits and upload to the related compliance record prior to issuance of building permits (see directions below). ☐ 2. Pay the required fees as stated in the memoranda from the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD), dated December 13, 2022, prior to issuance of building permits. Provide proof of payment. ☐ 3. Project shall comply with requirements for screening of mechanical and electrical equipment in accordance with Section 15-2011 of the FMC. Should corrections an/or revisions to site plan, floor, plan, and elevations result in changes, all exterior Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 July 24, 2023 Page 2 of 6 mechanical and electrical equipment shall be screened or incorporated into the design of buildings so as not to be visible from major streets, highways, passenger railways, or abutting Residential Districts. Roof access ladders shall be screened from Major Streets. Fire sprinkler risers should be designed for interior installation whenever possible where an exterior location would be visible from a Major Street. Where site conditions dictate an exterior location for the sprinkler riser, a three - foot clear space shall be provided between the screening materials and the riser. The alarm bell and fire department connection shall be installed so that they are visible from the street. ☐ 4. Lights shall be placed to deflect light away from adjacent properties and public streets, and to prevent adverse interference with the normal operation or enjoyment of surrounding properties. Please provide a photometric site and/or floor plan, where applicable, or other proof of compliance prior to issuance of building permits. ☐ 5. Landscaping must be in place before issuance p rior to occupancy. A Hold on Occupancy shall be placed on the proposed improvements until such time that landscaping has been approved and verified for proper installation by the Planning Division. (Include this note on the site and landscape plans.) ☐ 6. Prior to granting of occupancy, a written certification, signed by a landscape professional approved by the Planning and Development Department Director, shall be submitted stating that the required landscaping and irrigation system have been installed in accordance with the landscaping and irrigation plans approved by the Planning Division. (Include this note on the site and landscape plans.) PART B – OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS REQUIREMENTS Planner to check when completed ☐ 1. Department of Public Utilities (sewer, water, solid waste): Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Public Utilities Department memorandum dated December 13, 2022. ☐ 2. Fire Department: Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Fire Department memorandum dated December 14, 2022. ☐ 3. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD): Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached FMFCD memorandum dated December 13, 2022. ☐ 4. Fresno Irrigation District (FID): Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached FID memorandum dated December 16, 2022. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 July 24, 2023 Page 3 of 6 ☐ 5. Public Works, ROW Landscaping: Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Department of Public Works, Engineering memorandum dated December 19, 2022. ☐ 6. Public Works, Traffic Planning: Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Department of Public Works, Traffic Planning memorandum and Exhibit A (redlined site plan) dated December 21, 2022. ☐ 7. Public Works – Impact Fees: Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Department of Public Works, Development Impact Fees memorandum dated December 9, 2022. ☐ 8. Fresno Area Express (FAX) Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached FAX memorandum dated December 19, 2022. ☐ 9. Fresno County Environmental Health Division Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached Fresno County Environmental Health Division memorandum dated December 13, 2022. ☐ 10. Pacific, Gas & Electric (PG&E) Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached PG&E memorandum dated December 12, 2022. ☐ 11. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Comply with all of the requirements included within the attached SJVAPCD memorandum dated December 15, 2022. PART C – PLANNING DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS 1) Planning/Zoning/Environmental Compliance Requirements a) Development and operation shall take place in accordance with the attached “Notes and Requirements for Entitlement Applications” as applicable. b) Development shall take place in accordance with the policies of the Fresno General Plan, Woodward Park Community Plan, and with the Commercial – Regional planned land use designation. c) Development shall take place in accordance with the CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district, and all other applicable sections of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC), unless otherwise noted herein. d) Property development standards and operational conditions are contained in Articles 1 2 (Commercial Districts), 20 (General Site Requirements), 23 (Landscape), 24 (Parking and Loading), 25 (Performance Standards), and Section 15-2737 (Large-Format Retail) Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 July 24, 2023 Page 4 of 6 of the FMC. Any project revisions, development and operation must comply with these property development standards and operational conditions. e) Development shall comply with the City of Fresno Parking Manual, California Building Code, and American Disabilities Act requirements. 2) Miscellaneous Requirements a) Building plans and permits are required. b) Approval of this special permit shall be considered null and void in the event of failure by the applicant and/or the authorized representative, architect, engineer, or designer to disclose and delineate all facts and information relating to the subject property and the proposed development including, but not limited to, the following: i) All existing and proposed improvements including but not limited to buildings and structures, signs and their uses, trees, walls, driveways, outdoor storage, and open land use areas on the subject property and all of the preceding which are located on adjoining property and may encroach on the subject property; ii) All public and private easements, rights -of-way and any actual or potential prescriptive easements or uses of the subject property; and, iii) Existing and proposed grade differentials between the subject property and adjoining property zoned or planned for residential use. c) Approval of this site plan may become null and void in the event that development is not completed in accordance with all the conditions and requirements imposed on this special permit, the Zoning Ordinance, and all Public Works Standards a nd Specifications. The Planning and Development Department shall not assume responsibility for any deletions or omissions resulting from the Development Permit process or for additions or alterations to construction plans not specifically submitted and reviewed and approved pursuant to this site plan or subsequent amendments or revisions. APPEALS Please be advised that this project may be subject to a variety of discretionary conditions of approval. These conditions based on adopted City plans, ordinances and policies; those determined to be required through the interdepartmental/interagency review process; and those determined through the environmental assessment process as necessary to mitigate adverse effects on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The conditions of approval may also include requirements for development and use that would, on the whole, enhance the project and its relationship to the neighborhood and environment. All conditions of approval based on adopted plans, codes, and regulations are mandatory. Conditions based on the FMC may only be modified by variance, provided the findings required by FMC Section 15-5506 can be made. Discretionary conditions of approval may be appealed but will ultimately be deemed mand atory unless appealed in writing to the Director within 15 days. In the event you wish to appeal the Director’s decision, you may do so Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 July 24, 2023 Page 5 of 6 by filing a written appeal with the Director. The appeal shall include the appellant’s interest in or relationship to the subject property, the decision or action appealed and specific reasons why the applicant believes the decision or action appealed should not be upheld. If you wish to appeal the decision, a written request must be received at the Planning and Development Department by June 19, 2023. The written request should be addressed to Jennifer K. Clark, Director, include the application number referenced above, and delivered to the Planner. COMPLIANCE REVIEW PROCESS Please Note: To complete the compliance review process for building permits relative to planning and zoning issues, please upload electronic PDF copies of the corrected, final site plan, elevations, landscape, and irrigation plans, operational statement, any fees and title reports for required covenants, and any required studies or analyses into the compliance record for final review and approval into th e compliance record at least 15 days before applying for building permits. The compliance record number for this application is P23-02527. These documents can be uploaded electronically to the citizen access portal at www.fresno.gov/faaster. Contact Planner once any corrected exhibits are uploaded. It may be necessary to resubmit these “corrected exhibits” a second time if not all the conditions have been complied with or are not shown on the exhibits. Once the “corrected exhibits” are approved by the Development Services Division, please place these exhibits in the plan check set and contact Rob Holt at Robert.Holt@fresno.gov to schedule an appointment to stamp and signoff these exhibits. Copies of the final approved site plan, elevations, landscaping, and irrigation plans stamped by the Development Services Division must be substituted for unstamped copies of the same in each of the sets of construction plans submitted for plan check prior to the issuance of building permits. EXPIRATION The exercise of rights granted by these special permits must be commenced by July 24, 2026, (three years from the date of approval). An extension of up to one additional year may be granted, provided that the findings required under FMC Section 15 -5013-A.1 are made by the Director. All required improvements must be installed prior to the operation of the proposed use. If you have any questions regarding this letter, feel free to give me a call at the number listed above. Sincerely, Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Development Services Division Planning and Development Department Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 July 24, 2023 Page 6 of 6 Enclosures: Exhibits A, O, L-1, L-2, F, E-1 and E-2 dated November 22, 2022 Department and Other Agency Comments CIRRIRRIRRIRRIRRSTOPLLSTOPUUPIVNO PANHANDLINGRIGHT TURN ONLYCB@TCTC 347.22 @CLDRAIN INLETRIM 342.96INV. 8" 339.77(SW)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 10" 339.60(SW)INV. 8" 339.60(N)INV. 8" 339.60(NE)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 8" 339.98(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 344.75INV. 24" 337.23(NW)INV. 10" 337.23(NE)INV. 24" 337.23(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.10INV. 8" 340.20(S DRY)DRAIN INLETRIM 346.22INV. 10" 338.89(NE)INV. 10" 338.89(SW)348.43CONC348.70CONC348.73CONCDRAIN INLETRIM 345.87INV. 12" 342.01(N)INV. 6" 342.11(E)346.95CONC346.84CONCCATCH BASINTC 346.44 @CL346.33CONC150111510115102151031510415106151071510815110DSSN ABBY STREET(LOCAL)PROPOSEDLIVING SPACESAPN: 30320127W MINARETS AVE(LOCAL)E ALLUVIAL AVE(COLLECTOR)KOHL'SAPN: 30320126THE HOME DEPOTAPN: 30317081 LEGEND OF PROPOSED SITE FEATURES:0204080SCALE: 1" = 40'odellengineering.com1165 Scenic Drive, Suite AModesto, CA 95350LIVING SPACES 7354 N. ABBY STREET PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS FRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSITE PLAN1’PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL NOTESCONTACT INFORMATIONSITE PLAN NOTESGENERAL NOTES Planning & Development Department Development Services Division 2600 Fresno Street, Third Floor, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721-3604 Operational Statement Form Please use this form to clearly explain the proposed project. This information will assist all individuals, departments and agencies in their review and drafting of comments, conditions, suggestions or recommendations. The goal is to facilitate an accurate and complete description of your project in order to avoid unnecessary del ays in gathering additional information. If you have any questions about the requested information, please call Development Services at (559) 621-8277. Note: If the Operational Statement is not submitted or if the submittal is illegible, unclear or incomplete, the review of your project will not be accepted for processing. Project Description: is being submitted by of on behalf of and pertains to acres of property located at APN: and is zoned with a planned land use of The applicant is requesting authorization to: The proposed development will consist of The existing site currently consists of with existing parking spaces. The proposed hours of operation are from to on Other facts pertinent to this project are as follows: 1. Project Narrative: (communicate in detail all characteristics of your p roject; provide as much detail as possible; include basic information such as applicant/project name, business, product or service, anticipated traffic- customers, deliveries, etc., any special events, number of employees, required equipment, on -site storage, demolition or adaptive reuse of existing structures, noise generation, any hazardous materials, etc.) LIVINGSPACES.COM PO BOX 2309 Buena Park, CA 90621 Cit of Fresno Planning and Development Department Development Services Division 2600 Fresno St., Third Floor, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 RE: Development Application Review, Living Spaces Furniture – 7354 North Abby St. To Whom It May Concern: Living Spaces Furniture is pleased to submit a Development Application for a new ground-up project for an approximate 105,000 SF furniture showroom in the city of Fresno. Living Spaces Furniture is a rapidly growing retail furniture company founded in 2003 in Southern California and currently operates thirty stores, including five distribution centers, located in major metro areas in California, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas. Building Layout and Use. The building will include a retail furniture showroom, small café serving prepackaged meals and offering beer and wine to approximately 30 – 40 guests (we will apply for a Type 41 ABC license), a kids room providing entertainment such as movies, video games and a play structure, a receiving/storage area, small kitchen, and employee areas. The entrance to the building is on the west elevation. The loading dock and customer pick up (CPU) will be located on the northeast corner of the building. An enclosure will house a back-up generator, electrical equipment, and dumpsters at the northeast elevation. Employees. The furniture store will employ approximately 70 to 100 full-time and part-time employees. Approximately 40 employees will be on the site during a typical business day and 55 employees during peak hours of operation. Hours of Operation. The hours of operation are 10 am to 9 pm Monday through Friday and 9 am to 9 pm on Saturdays and Sundays. The café is open from 12 pm to 8 pm daily. Living Spaces is closed Easter, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Peak periods are on the weekends between noon and 6 pm and during holidays (Black Friday, Memorial Day, etc.). LIVINGSPACES.COM Store Deliveries. Each day, the store will receive deliveries of furniture from either or Rialto, CA or Fremont, CA Distribution Center. All deliveries will be made at the loading area located on the northeast corner of the building. Approximately two to three daily deliveries of inventory will be made using 26-foot box trucks and, occasionally, a 53-foot trailer. These deliveries occur in the early morning before business hours. Food service deliveries occur 1-2 times weekly, prior to business opening as well. Customer Furniture Deliveries and Customer Pick-Up (CPU). Customers will have the option to pick up furniture from the store or have furniture delivered to their home or business. Customers electing to pick up their furniture from the store will do so at the CPU area on the northeast side of the building. At the CPU area, customers park their vehicles in a designated parking stall adjacent to the receiving area and furniture will be loaded into their vehicle. CPU hours are 12 noon to 9 pm daily. Approximately 15 customer pick-ups would occur on weekdays and 40 pick-ups on weekends. We look forward to working with the City of Fresno on this project. Please don’t hesitate to contact me for any clarifications or additional information at brian.saltikov@livinspaces.com, or 714.713.9931. Sincerely, Brian Saltikov Senior Project Manager Real Estate Development Living Spaces IRRLLS S PLANT LEGEND MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET L2SURFACE PARKING AREA SHADE REQUIREMENTS NORTH ABBY STREETodellengineering.com 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350 LIVING SPACES7354 N. ABBY STREETPRELIMINARY PLANSFRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what's below. before you dig.Call R 2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 0 10 20 40 20' 1 348.43 CONC 348.70 CONC 348.73 CONC D S SCALE: 1" = 0 10 20 40 20'MATCHLINE- SEE SHEET L1LIVING SPACES BUILDING IRRIGATED LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY TABLE WATER BUDGET CALCULATIONS MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE MAWA TOTAL= ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USE ETWU TOTAL= HYDROZONE INFORMATION TABLE LANDSCAPE AREAS SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREAS odellengineering.com 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350 LIVING SPACES7354 N. ABBY STREETPRELIMINARY PLANSFRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what's below. before you dig.Call R 2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 2 Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 2Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 FLOOR PLAN032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" CRCR CR SSSSCAFECOW SHELF EXIT240 36" EXIT240 36" EXIT963 195" EXIT240 36" Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 3Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 ELEVATIONS032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" 5 7 6 6 67 75 51171 23 4 6 4 61 12 N F F F FF FN NAAFCJ AA G INF M FA DAG H G BH GB +32-6” +34-6” +34-6” +32-6”+34-6”+33-6” +26-0” +75-0” +75-0” +34-6” +42-0” +22-0”+22-0” +22-0” +13-0” T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT T.O. OPENINGT.O. OPENING T.O. OPENING B.O. CANOPY A CONCRETE PANEL F ALUMINUM STOREFRONT: ARCADIA-AB8 "BLACK"K METAL ROLL-UP DOOR 1 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7015 "REPOSE GRAY"6 GLASS: VISION B REVEAL G STONE VENEER (CORONADO-8" CLASSIC JERUSALEM "SILVER ASH")L LIGHT FIXTURE 2 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7020 "BLACK FOX"7 GLASS: REEDED C STUCCO H TENANT SIGNAGE (REFER TO SIGNAGE PACKAGE)M METAL COLUMN 3 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7017 "DORIAN GRAY" D DOOR I MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR: HUNTER DOUGLAS-8461 "REGATTA TEAK"N METAL CANOPY 4 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7019 "GAUNTLET GRAY" E TENANT SIGNAGE J METAL PANEL: (REYNOBOND ACM "PEWTER")5 METAL COLOR: MAPES-AB13 "EXTRA DARK BRONZE" MATERIALS FINISHES NOTE: 1. SIGNAGE IS CONCEPTUAL AND WILL BE UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. 2. RTU WILL BE SCREENED BY PARAPETS WEST ELEVATION (FRONT) SOUTH ELEVATION (RIGHT) 1 2 N. ABBEY AVE.E. ALLUVIA L A V E .HIGHWAY 41KEY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) 2 1 Architecture + Planning 888.456.5849 ktgy.com 7354 N. ABBY ST., FRESNO, CA 93720 # 2022-0509 LIVING SPACES FRESNO NOVEMBER 17, 2022 PLANNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 4Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Blvd. La Mirada, CA 90638 ELEVATIONS032168 SCALE: 116" = 1'-0" 5 6 7 5 2 2 31 3 61 NLK F F N A A AD A G FAG G BH G H GB +75-0” +75-0” C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT C-R MAX BUILDING HEIGHT +32-6” +15-0” +34-6” +34-6” +42-0” +32-6”+33-6” T.O. PARAPET T.O. SCREEN WALL T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET T.O. PARAPET A CONCRETE PANEL F ALUMINUM STOREFRONT: ARCADIA-AB8 "BLACK"K METAL ROLL-UP DOOR 1 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7015 "REPOSE GRAY"6 GLASS: VISION B REVEAL G STONE VENEER (CORONADO-8" CLASSIC JERUSALEM "SILVER ASH")L LIGHT FIXTURE 2 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7020 "BLACK FOX"7 GLASS: REEDED C STUCCO H TENANT SIGNAGE (REFER TO SIGNAGE PACKAGE)M METAL COLUMN 3 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7017 "DORIAN GRAY" D DOOR I MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR: HUNTER DOUGLAS-8461 "REGATTA TEAK"N METAL CANOPY 4 PAINT: SHERWIN WILLIAMS-SW7019 "GAUNTLET GRAY" E TENANT SIGNAGE J METAL PANEL: (REYNOBOND ACM "PEWTER")5 METAL COLOR: MAPES-AB13 "EXTRA DARK BRONZE" MATERIALS FINISHES NOTE: 1. SIGNAGE IS CONCEPTUAL AND WILL BE UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. 2. RTU WILL BE SCREENED BY PARAPETS EAST ELEVATION (REAR) NORTH ELEVATION (LEFT) 3 4 N. ABBEY AVE.E. ALLUVIA L A V E .HIGHWAY 41KEY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) 4 3 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES MEMORANDUM DATE: December 13, 2022 TO: MINDI MARIBOHO – Development Services Coordinator Planning & Development Department – Current Planning FROM: DEJAN PAVIC, PE, Projects Administrator Department of Public Utilities – Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT: DPU CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR P22-04122 LIVING SPACES (FURNITURE SHOWROOM) APN 303-201-27 (Note: cross-reference to P22-04472) General Requirements Water Service Requirements The Project is located within the Pinedale County Water District service area, and it is anticipated that Pinedale County Water District will provide water services (potable water and fire protection) to the proposed development. The applicant shall contact the Pinedale County Water District for water service conditions and/or restrictions. Sewer Service Requirements The Project is located within the Pinedale County Water District service area, and it is anticipated that Pinedale County Water District will provide sewer service to the proposed development. The applicant shall contact the Pinedale County Water District for sewer service conditions and/or restrictions. Solid Waste Requirements The following Solid Waste Requirements for the purpose of establishing City solid waste service policies for office/commercial space. These service requirements apply to all office/commercial complexes within the City of Fresno. 1. This location is serviced by a Commercial Solid Waste Franchisee. For service information, please contact Allied Waste at (559) 275-1551 or (800) 493-4285. 2. All office/commercial complexes are required to subscribe for recycling services, per FMC 9-405.1. Recycling services may be provided by the City of Fresno or any private recycling service provider. Recycling services must include, at the DPU CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR P22-04122 LIVING SPACES (FURNITURE SHOWROOM) APN 303-201-27 (Note: cross-reference to P22-04472) December 13, 2022 Page 2 of 2 minimum, cardboard, newspaper, paper, glass, plastics, beverage containers, and metal recycling. 3. All trash and recyclable material must be placed in approved containers, per FMC 9-404. At no time may trash and recyclable material be placed on the ground or pavement. 4. Bin enclosures, if provided on site, must be used exclusively for the storage of trash and recycling bins, per The Public Works Standard Specifications P-33 and P-34. 5. The proposed Project will generate 133.8 cubic yards per week per the proposed use and square footage of the buildings. Therefore, this location will require 6 (six) 2-cell trash enclosures, designed to accommodate separate facilities containing 2 (two) – 4 cu. yd. bins, one for trash and one for recycling collection to be constructed to current (Public Works Standard Specifications) Solid Waste Standards (P-33, P-34, and P-95) to be serviced twice a week. 6. Service Route Permits and Location Permits are required for all private trash company services within the City of Fresno per FMC 9-408. All private company trash service arrangements must be pre-approved through Solid Waste Management Division. 7. Developer will need to provide a 44-foot (centerline) turning radius at all corners and a T-turnaround (or hammerhead) area where the solid waste vehicle is to turn around. 8. Americans with Disability Act (ADA) requirement for office/commercial complexes (developments): Developer shall install (construct) a trash enclosure(s) for the Project that complies with the City’s ADA requirements as defined in the City’s Standard Drawings, Details and Specifications. The certificate of occupancy for the Project shall be withheld until developer installs (constructs) the trash enclosure (s) in accordance with the City’s ADA requirements. & 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, California 93721 -3604 www.fresno.gov Fire Department December 14, 2022 Steven Robinson Comments This project was reviewed by the Fire Department only for requirements related to water supply, fire hydrants, and fire apparatus access to the building(s) on site. Review for compliance with fire and life safety requirements for the building interior and its intended use are reviewed by both the Fire Department and the Building and Safety Section of DARM when a submittal for building plan review is made as required by the California Building Code by the architect or engineer of record for the building. All back checks are performed electronically through the Accela Program (FAASTER portal). You must submit the following documentation to the Building Department: 1) Provide copy of the original submittals (drawings, calculations, and supporting documents) including mark-ups from the plan reviewers who worked on your documents. 2) Provide a complete set of revised drawings, calculations, and supporting documents addressing plan check comments (all changes shall be clouded). 3) Provide a detailed typed response to each item listed in the plan check correction comments document. If you have additional questions regarding back check submittals, please contact the Building Department. All revisions to plans shall be called out with a cloud or delta. If you have questions and would like more information regarding FFD Develo pment Policies please see the following: https://www.fresno.gov/fire-training/manuals-and- forms/ 1. The Fire Department Connection (FDC) show on the site plan at the front of the building (N. Abby side) next to the hydrant must be removed from the fire water main and located on the fire sprinkler supply lateral piping. Show the revised location on the site plan. 2. Show the fire department riser on the site plan. Clarify if a fire pump is being proposed, if so show the location on the site plan. 3. Show the fire alarm bell on the face of the N. Abby side of the building. PROJECT NO: APN: ADDRESS: SENT: 2022-04122 7354 N. ABBY ST. 303-201-27 December 13, 2022 PUBLIC AGENCY ROBERT HOLT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING CITY OF FRESNO 2600 FRESNO STREET, THIRD FLOOR FRESNO, CA 93721-3604 DEVELOPER BRIAN SALTIKOV, LIVING SPACES 14501 ARTESIA BLVD. LA MIRADA, CA 90638 Drainage Area(s)Preliminary Fee(s) CN $0.00 Development Review Service Charge(s)Fee(s) NOR Review $272.00 To be paid prior to release of District comments to Public Agency and Developer. Grading Plan Review $1,381.00 Amount to be submitted with first grading plan submittal. Total Drainage Fee: $0.00 Total Service Charge: $1,653.00 The proposed development will generate storm runoff which produces potentially significant environmental impacts and which must be properly discharged and mitigated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. The District in cooperation with the City and County has developed and adopted the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. Compliance with and implementation of this Master Plan by this development project will satisfy the drainage related CEQA/NEPA impact of the project mitigation requirements. Pursuant to the District’s Development Review Fee Policy, the subject project shall pay review fees for issuance of this Notice of Requirements (NOR) and any plan submittals requiring the District’s reviews. The NOR fee shall be paid to the District by Developer before the Notice of Requirement will be submitted to the City. The Grading Plan fee shall be paid upon first submittal. The Storm Drain Plan fee shall be paid prior to return/pick up of first submittal. The proposed development shall pay drainage fees pursuant to the Drainage Fee Ordinance prior to issuance of a building permit at the rates in effect at the time of such issuance. The fee indicated above is valid through 2/28/23 based on the site plan submitted to the District on 11/22/22 Contact FMFCD for a revised fee in cases where changes are made in the proposed site plan which materially alter the proposed impervious area. Considerations which may affect the fee obligation(s) or the timing or form of fee payment: a.)Fees related to undeveloped or phased portions of the project may be deferrable. b.) Fees may be calculated based on the actual percentage of runoff if different than that typical for the zone district under which the development is being undertaken and if permanent provisions are made to assure that the site remains in that configuration. c.)Creditable storm drainage facilities may be constructed, or required to be constructed in lieu of paying fees. d.)The actual cost incurred in constructing Creditable drainage system facilities is credited against the drainage fee obligation. e.)When the actual costs incurred in constructing Creditable facilities exceeds the drainage fee obligation, reimbursement will be made for the excess costs from future fees collected by the District from other development. f.) Any request for a drainage fee refund requires the entitlement cancellation and a written request addressed to the General Manager of the District within 60 days from payment of the fee. A non refundable $300 Administration fee or 5% of the refund whichever is less will be retained without fee credit. 5469 E. OLIVE - FRESNO, CA 93727 - (559) 456-3292 - FAX (559) 456-3194 FRESNO METROPOLITAN FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENTS File No. 210.412 Page 1 of 3 Approval of this development shall be conditioned upon compliance with these District Requirements. 1. a.Drainage from the site shall X b.Grading and drainage patterns shall be as identified on Exhibit No. 1 c.The grading and drainage patterns shown on the site plan conform to the adopted Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. 2.The proposed development shall construct and/or dedicate Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan facilities located within the development or necessitated by any off-site improvements required by the approving agency: Developer shall construct facilities as shown on Exhibit No. 1 as X None required. 3.The following final improvement plans and information shall be submitted to the District for review prior to final development approval: X Grading Plan Street Plan Storm Drain Plan Water & Sewer Plan Final Map Drainage Report (to be submitted with tentative map) Other None Required 4.Availability of drainage facilities: X a.Permanent drainage service is available provided the developer can verify to the satisfaction of the City that runoff can be safely conveyed to the Master Plan inlet(s). b.The construction of facilities required by Paragraph No. 2 hereof will provide permanent drainage service. c.Permanent drainage service will not be available. The District recommends temporary facilities until permanent service is available. d.See Exhibit No. 2. 5.The proposed development: Appears to be located within a 100 year flood prone area as designated on the latest Flood Insurance Rate Maps available to the District, necessitating appropriate floodplain management action. (See attached Floodplain Policy.) X Does not appear to be located within a flood prone area. 6. The subject site contains a portion of a canal or pipeline that is used to manage recharge, storm water, and/or flood flows. The existing capacity must be preserved as part of site development. Additionally, site development may not interfere with the ability to operate and maintain the canal or pipeline. 5469 E. OLIVE - FRESNO, CA 93727 - (559) 456-3292 - FAX (559) 456-3194 FRESNO METROPOLITAN FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENTS Page 2 of 3 7.The Federal Clean Water Act and the State General Permits for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Industrial Activities (State General Permits) require developers of construction projects disturbing one or more acres, and discharges associated with industrial activity not otherwise exempt from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting, to implement controls to reduce pollutants, prohibit the discharge of waters other than storm water to the municipal storm drain system, and meet water quality standards. These requirements apply both to pollutants generated during construction, and to those which may be generated by operations at the development after construction. a.State General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activities, effective July 1, 2010, as amended. A State General Construction Permit is required for all clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground that result in soil disturbance of at least one acre (or less than one acre) if part of a larger common plan of development or sale). Permittees are required to: submit a Notice of Intent and Permit Registration Documents to be covered and must pay a permit fee to the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board), develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan, eliminate non-storm water discharges, conduct routine site inspections, train employees in permit compliance, and complete an annual certification of compliance. b.State General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities, April, 2014 (available at the District Office). A State General Industrial Permit is required for specific types of industries described in the NPDES regulations or by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. The following categories of industries are generally required to secure an industrial permit: manufacturing; trucking; recycling; and waste and hazardous waste management. Specific exemptions exist for manufacturing activities which occur entirely indoors. Permittees are required to: submit a Notice of Intent to be covered and must pay a permit fee to the State Water Resources Control Board, develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan, eliminate non-storm water discharges, conduct routine site inspections, train employees in permit compliance, sample storm water runoff and test it for pollutant indicators, and annually submit a report to the State Board. c.The proposed development is encouraged to select and implement storm water quality controls recommended in the Fresno-Clovis Storm Water Quality Management Construction and Post-Construction Guidelines (available at the District Office) to meet the requirements of the State General Permits, eliminate the potential for non-storm water to enter the municipal storm drain system, and where possible minimize contact with materials which may contaminate storm water runoff. 8.A requirement of the District may be appealed by filing a written notice of appeal with the Secretary of the District within ten days of the date of this Notice of Requirements. 9.The District reserves the right to modify, reduce or add to these requirements, or revise fees, as necessary to accommodate changes made in the proposed development by the developer or requirements made by other agencies. 10. X See Exhibit No. 2 for additional comments, recommendations and requirements. Debbie Campbell Anthony Zaragoza Design Engineer, RCE Engineer III Digitally signed by Debbie Campbell Date: 12/13/2022 9:49:54 AM Digitally signed by Anthony Zaragoza Date: 12/7/2022 1:44:32 PM CC: RIVER PARK PROPERTIES II 265 E. RIVER PARK CIR., #150 FRESNO, CA 93720 5469 E. OLIVE - FRESNO, CA 93727 - (559) 456-3292 - FAX (559) 456-3194 FRESNO METROPOLITAN FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT NOTICE OF REQUIREMENTS Page 3 of 3 "ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ð"ðFR DPA2022-04122 12 1224812108 121224 "EXEMPT"STATE ROUTE 41ABBY ST ALLEY A LLU V IA L A V EPINEDALE AVE BIRCH AVE MINARETS AVE SPRUCE AVE ALLEY ÄÆÄÅ41Bos No. 125''CN'' 30 3624 181 5 24F R E S N O M E T R O P O L I T A N F L O O D C O N T R O L D I S T R I C TEXHIBIT NO. 1 FR DPA 2022-04122 Prepared by: davide Date: 12/6/2022 Path: K:\Autocad\D WGS\0EXH IBIT\CITYDPA\2022-04122.mxd O 1 " = 200 ' DRAINAGE AREA "CN" LEGEN D NOTE: THIS MAP IS SCHEMATIC.DISTANCES, AMOUNT OF CREDITABLEFACILITIES, AND LOCATION OF INLETBOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE. Existing Master Plan Facilities Inlet Boundary Drain age Area Boundary Private Fac ilitiesð Existing FID Facilities Existing Flood Easement Limits Of FR D PA 2022-04122 A private storm drain system currently exists within the area of the proposed project as shown on Exhibit No. 1 as Private Facilities. The Private Facilities connect to the District’s Master Plan facilities. Drainage from the site shall be directed towards these facilities. The developer of FR DPA 2022-04122 shall relocate and/or remove the Private Facilities as required to avoid the proposed project. Any private facilities in conflict with the proposed project will require a Release of Liability Agreement with the District. There is an existing Flood Easement within the area of the proposed project as shown on Exhibit No. 1. The existing flood easement area, or portions of it, may be quitclaimed if developed in conformance with District Standards. The District requests that the grading engineer contact the District as early as possible to review grading and quitclaim options. In an effort to improve storm runoff quality, outdoor storage areas shall be constructed and maintained such that material that may generate contaminants will be prevented from contact with rainfall and runoff and thereby prevent the conveyance of contaminants in runoff into the storm drain system. The District encourages, but does not require that roof drains from non-residential development be constructed such that they are directed onto and through a landscaped grassy swale area to filter out pollutants from roof runoff. Runoff from areas where industrial activities, product, or merchandise come into contact with and may contaminate storm water must be treated before discharging it off-site or into a storm drain. Roofs covering such areas are recommended. Cleaning of such areas by sweeping instead of washing is to be required unless such wash water can be directed to the sanitary sewer system. Storm drains receiving untreated runoff from such areas shall not be connected to the District’s system. Loading docks, depressed areas, and areas servicing or fueling vehicles are specifically subject to these requirements. The District’s policy governing said industrial site NPDES program requirements is available on the District’s website at: www.fresnofloodcontrol.org or contact the District’s Environmental Department for further information regarding these policies related to industrial site requirements. Development No.FR DPA No. 2022-04122 OTHER REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT NO. 2 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO: Robert Holt, Planner III Planning & Development Department FROM: Adrian Gonzalez, Senior Engineering Technician Public Works, Traffic Operations and Planning Division DATE: December 19, 2022 SUBJECT: P22-04122; 7354 North Abby Street (APN: 303-201-27) located on the east side of North Abby Street, south of East Alluvial Avenue. The Department of Public Works offers the following comments regarding the requirements for landscaping and irrigation in the street right s- of-way, landscape easements, outlots and median islands: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS STREET TREE REQUIREMENTS 1. The subdivider is required to provide street trees on all public street frontages per Fresno Municipal Code and for the dedication of planting and buffer landscaping easements as determined by the Planning Department. Street trees shall be planted at the minimum rate of one tree for each 40' of street frontage or one tree per home (whichever is greater) by the Developer. The subdivider is required to provide irrigation for all street trees. The irrigation system shall comply with AB 1881. 2. Street Tree Planting by Developer: For those lots having internal street tree frontage available for street tree planting, the developer shall plant one tree for each 40' of street frontage, or one tree per lot having street frontage, whichever is greater. Tree planting shall be within a 10' Public Planting and Utility Easement. a. Street tree inspection fees shall be collected for each 40' of public street frontage or one tree per lot whichever is greater. b. Street trees shall be planted in accordance with the City of Fresno, Department of Public Works “Standard Specifications.” c. Landscape plans for all public use areas, such as parkways, buffers, medians and trails, shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works, Engineering Services. A street tree planting permit shall be required for all residential street tree planting. d. Upon acceptance of the required work, warranty security shall be furnished to or retained by the city for guaranty and warranty of the work for a period of ninety days following acceptance. e. There are no designated street trees for any of the streets on this project. Please choose appropriate trees form the list of Approved Street Trees. Please submit all landscape and irrigation plans to: dpwplansubmittal@fresno.gov for plan review to the scale of 1” =20’ prior to the installation of any landscaping within the right-of-way. Page 1 of 4 12/21/2022 P22-04122 ABBY 7354 N.doc SUBJECT: Conditions of Approval for P22-04122 DATE: December 21, 2022 TO: Robert Holt, Planner III Planning and Development Department FROM: Louise Gilio, Traffic Planning Supervisor Public Works Department, Traffic Planning Section ADDRESS: 7354 North Abby Street APN: 303-201-27 ATTENTION: The items below require a separate process with additional fees and timelines, in addition to the development permit process. Submit the following items early to avoid delaying approval of building permits. Final approval of the site plan is contingent on receipt of all items checked below. To be completed: Point of Contact Department and Contact Information Cross Access Agreement The proposal to access the adjacent parcel will require a cross access agreement. Either remove access or obtain a cross access agreement through Planning and Development. Robert Holt Planning and Development Department (559) 621-8056 Robert.Holt@fresno.gov PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS The following requirements are based on city records and the accuracy of the existing and proposed on-site and off-site conditions depicted on the exhibits submitted. Requirements not addressed due to omission or misrepresentation of information, on which this review process is dependent, will be imposed whenever such conditions are disclosed. Construct additional offsite improvements, including but not limited to, concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk, approaches, ramps, pavement, utility relocations, etc. in accordance with City of Fresno’s Public Works Standards, Specifications, and the approved street plans. Page 2 of 4 12/21/2022 P22-04122 ABBY 7354 N.doc Repair all damaged and/or off grade off-site concrete street improvements as determined by the City of Fresno Public Works Department, Construction Management Division, (559) 621-5600. Pedestrian paths of travel must also meet current accessibility regulations. All existing sidewalks in excess of 2% maximum cross slope must be brought into compliance prior to acceptance by Public Works. Underground all existing overhead utilities within the limits of this site/map as per Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-2017 and Public Works Policy No. 260.01. The construction of any private overhead, surface or sub-surface structures, and appurtenances in the public right of way is prohibited unless an Encroachment Covenant is approved by the City of Fresno Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division, (559) 621-8693. Encroachment Covenant must be approved prior to issuance of building permits. When permanent facilities are not available or adequate from the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, the applicant shall identify a temporary onsite storm water basin per Public Works Standard P-97 for review and approval from Public Works. Coordinate with the Public Works Department (Scott Tyler at Scott.Tyler@fresno.gov) and Development Department (Kevin Rein at Kevin.Rein@fresno.gov). Abby Street: Local (Provide the following as notes on the site plan.) 1. Construction Requirements: a. Remove existing driveway approaches not identified for utilization as noted on Exhibit “A”, and install sidewalk, curb, gutter and paving per City of Fresno Public Works Standards P-5 and P-48 to match existing or proposed street improvement line and grade per Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) 13-211. b. Construct a driveway approach to Public Works Standards P-2 and P-6, as approved on the site plan. Construct permanent paving as needed per Public Works Standard P-48. c. Saw cut 5’ x 6’ tree wells per modified Public Works Standard P-8. Planting and Irrigation of street trees shall conform to the minimum spacing, guidelines, and requirements as stated in the Standard Specification, Section 26-2.11(C) and Assembly Bill 1881. d. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard E-1 within the limits of this application. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Works Standard E-9A, E-9B for Locals. -OR- Show the existing streetlight locations on the plans, -AND- that they are constructed per current City of Fresno Standards. e. Provide a 12’ visibility triangle at all driveways, per Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) 15-2018B. Page 3 of 4 12/21/2022 P22-04122 ABBY 7354 N.doc Public Improvement Plans are required and shall be approved by the City Engineer. Contact Scott Tyler at (559) 621-8654 or at Scott.Tyler@fresno.gov and submit Public Improvement Plans for all required work, in a single package, to Engineering Services Division. Dedications shall be sufficient to accommodate additional paving and any other grading or transitions as necessary based on a 45 MPH design speed for Collectors and 55 MPH for Arterials. Utility poles, streetlights, signals, etc. shall be relocated as determined by the City Engineer. The performance of any work within the public right of way and/or easements (including street, bike, pedestrian, landscape, and utility easements) requires a Street Work Permit prior to commencement of work. Contact Public Works Department at (559) 621-8800, 10 working days prior to construction of any improvements in the public right-of-way and/or easements. All improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the City of Fresno, Public Works Department Standard Drawings and Specifications. Traffic Control Plans shall be required to ensure the sidewalk, or an approved accessible path remains open during construction. Contact Melessa Avakian at (559) 621-8812 or at Melessa.Avakian@fresno.gov and submit Traffic Control Plans to the Traffic Operations and Planning Division. All work shall be reviewed, approved, completed, and accepted prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy. Two working days before commencing excavation operations within the street right of way and/or utility easements, all existing underground facilities shall have been located by Underground Services Alert (USA) Call 811. Any survey monuments within the area of construction shall be preserved or reset by a person licensed to practice Land Surveying in the State of California. PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS Off-Street Parking Facilities and Geometrics: Contact the Planning and Development Department for review and approval of onsite parking. The parking lot is required to meet the City of Fresno’s Parking Manual, Public Works Standards P-21, P-22, P-23 and Specifications. Parking must also comply with the California Building Code’s accessibility requirements and the Fire and Solid Waste Department’s minimum turning templates. Coordinate drainage requirements with Public Works Engineering Services and Planning and Development Commercial Operations. Make corrections, as noted on Exhibit “A”. Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) Fee: This project shall pay all applicable TSMI Fees at the time of building permit. Contact the Public Works Department, Frank Saburit at (559)621-8797. The fees are based on the Master fee schedule. Fresno Major Street Impact (FMSI) Fees: This entitlement is in the New Growth Area; therefore, pay all applicable growth area fees and citywide regional street impact fees. / Contact the Public Works Department, Frank Saburit at (559) 621-8797. Page 4 of 4 12/21/2022 P22-04122 ABBY 7354 N.doc Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF): Pay all applicable RTMF fees to the Joint Powers Agency located at 2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201, Fresno, CA 93721; (559) 233-4148 ext. 200; www.fresnocog.org. Provide proof of payment or exemption prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. In order to obtain street or building permit approval from the Public Works Department, an approval stamp with a signature from Traffic Planning is required on the site plan and inserted in the building sets. Questions relative to these conditions may be directed to Louise Gilio (559) 621-8678 or Louise.Gilio@fresno.gov in the Public Works Department, Traffic Planning Section. CIRRIRRIRRIRRIRRSTOPLLSTOPUUPIVNO PANHANDLINGRIGHT TURN ONLYCB@TCTC 347.22 @CLDRAIN INLETRIM 342.96INV. 8" 339.77(SW)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 10" 339.60(SW)INV. 8" 339.60(N)INV. 8" 339.60(NE)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.08INV. 8" 339.98(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 344.75INV. 24" 337.23(NW)INV. 10" 337.23(NE)INV. 24" 337.23(S)DRAIN INLETRIM 343.10INV. 8" 340.20(S DRY)DRAIN INLETRIM 346.22INV. 10" 338.89(NE)INV. 10" 338.89(SW)348.43CONC348.70CONC348.73CONCDRAIN INLETRIM 345.87INV. 12" 342.01(N)INV. 6" 342.11(E)346.95CONC346.84CONCCATCH BASINTC 346.44 @CL346.33CONC150111510115102151031510415106151071510815110DSSN ABBY STREET(LOCAL)PROPOSEDLIVING SPACESAPN: 30320127W MINARETS AVE(LOCAL)E ALLUVIAL AVE(COLLECTOR)KOHL'SAPN: 30320126THE HOME DEPOTAPN: 30317081 LEGEND OF PROPOSED SITE FEATURES:0204080SCALE: 1" = 40'odellengineering.com1165 Scenic Drive, Suite AModesto, CA 95350LIVING SPACES 7354 N. ABBY STREET PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS FRESNO, CALIFORNIAKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSITE PLAN1’PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL NOTESCONTACT INFORMATIONSITE PLAN NOTESGENERAL NOTES CITY OF FRESNO DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACT FEE ESTIMATE Proposed Development: A.P.N. Planned Land Use: Current Zoning: Site Area: Building Area: Entitlement: Estimate Date: WATER CONNECTION CHARGES Water provided by Pinedale County Water District SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES Sewer provided by Pinedale County Water District CITYWIDE/REGIONAL IMPACT FEES Service Area Quantity Units Fee Rate Amount Due Notes Citywide Fire Facilities Impact Fee Comm. Retail 104,867 Sq.Ft.$602.00 $63,129.93 [7] Citywide Police Facilities Impact Fee Comm. Retail 104,867 Sq.Ft.$886.00 $92,912.16 [7] Citywide Regional Street Charge Comm. Retail 7.77 AC $15,769.00 $122,525.13 [6] New Growth Area Major Street Charge Comm. Retail 1.34 AC $50,710.00 $67,951.40 [6] Citywide Traffic Signal Charge Home Improvement 104,867 Sq.Ft.$1,439.00 $150,903.61 [6] Total Citywide/Regional Impact Fees $497,422.24 Total Fees and Charges $497,422.24 Furniture Store / Showroom - 7354 N. Abby Street The following estimates are based on preliminary conceptual information. The exact fee obligation will be computed at the time of development by Public Works Department, Land Division & Engineering. The fee rates in effect at the time of development shall apply. Regional Commercial December 9, 2022 303-201-27 +/- 7.77 acres CR/UGM/cz +/- 104,867 P22-04122 See notes on page 2 Printed 12/9/2022 Page 1 CITY OF FRESNO DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACT FEE ESTIMATE NOTES: [6] Due at Building Permit [7] Due with Certificate of Occupancy [9] Parks fee applicable only to residential developments Prepared and Reviewed By: Frank Saburit Date: December 9, 2022 (559) 621-8797 City of Fresno Public Works Department Land Division & Engineering [5] The Trunk Sewer Charge is applicable to single family, duplex, and triplex developments. (FMC 6-302(i)); For Condominium conversions, Trunk Sewer Charges may stay in the S.T.E.P. if the project continues to be master metered for water. If the condominiums are individually metered, the developer will pay the pro-rated portion of these fees. [10] Fee not applicable on replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure that has been destroyed or demolished provided that the Building Permit for new construction is obtained within one year after the building is destroyed or demolished, and there is no change in the land use designation. (Res. Nos. 2005-428, 429) [11] Subject to the acceptance date of the vesting tentative map, fee may not be applicable until 2-years after the date of Final Map recordation; when applicable, fee is due at Building Permit for all un-developed lots at the fee rate then in effect. [8] Construction Fee Credits may be applicable. Contact the Public Works Engineering Services Division at (559) 621-8685 for more information. [3] Upon occupancy of the project, the subdivider shall pay the appropriate sewer facility charge pursuant to the Simple Tiered Equity Program (STEP) as determined by the City of Fresno Department of Finance, Utilities Billing & Collection Division (559- 621-6765). [4] The Wastewater Facilities Charge (WWFC) is applicable to single family, duplex, and triplex developments. (FMC 6-302(i)); For Condominium conversions, WWFC may stay in the S.T.E.P. if the project continues to be master metered for water. If the condominiums are individually metered, the developer will pay the pro-rated portion of these fees. [2] Sewer House branches to be installed by Developer at the Developer's cost. Outside agencies developer impact fees: It is the developer's responsibility to contact those agencies for their fee estimates. These agencies include but are not limited to; Fresno County, Council of Fresno County Governments (FCOG), Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD), various School Districts that serve the City of Fresno, etc. Within the City of Fresno's sphere of influence there are other sewer and water utility providers. If the project is within one of those districts, the developer must provide confirmation from the representitive Districts that all conditions for sewer and/or water connections and services have been satisfied, prior to issuance of a Building Permit. [1] Fees for Water Service Connections and/or Meters, and Water Capacity due at time of development. Charges based on service and/or meter sizes, (Rates as established by the Master Fee Schedule), determined by the Developer. NOTICE OF 90-DAY PROTEST PERIOD (GOVERNMENT CODE §66020(d)(1)) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision and/or development (a) shall be filed at the time of approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to be imposed on a development project. Each local agency shall provide to the project applicant a notice in writing at the time of the approval of the project or at the time of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions, a statement of the amount of the fees or a description of the dedications, reservations, or other exactions, and notification that the 90-day approval period in which the applicant may protest has begun. ● The Board of Directors of the Fresno County Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee Agency approved Resolution No. 2009-01 requiring the payment of Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee. The effective date of this resolution is January 1, 2010. Please contact the Council of Fresno County Governments (FCOG) at (559) 233-4148 to determine this fee obligation. Confirmation by the FCOG is required before the City of Fresno can issue the Certificate of Occupancy. ●On December 8,2016,Fresno City Council adopted Resolution No.2016-258,effective July 1,2018,administratively updating the impact fees adjusted by this resolution annually to the percentage change in the 20-City Construction Cost Index as reported in the Engineering News Record (ENR) for the 12-month period ending of May of the year of adjustment. ●Payment of Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD)impact fees may be required.Please contact FMFCD at (559)456- 3292 to determine fee obligation. ●Payment of applicable school district fees is required prior to issuance of Building Permit.Please contact the respective school district to satisfy your fee obligation.Confirmation by the respective school district is required before the City of Fresno can issue building permits See notes on page 2 Printed 12/9/2022 Page 2 & 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, California 93721 -3604 www.fresno.gov Fresno Area Express (FAX) December 19, 2022 Comments 1. Protect in place Bus Stop #2266 (SE Alluvial – Abby). & 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, California 93721 -3604 www.fresno.gov Fresno County Environmental Health Division December 13, 2022 Comments 1. The applicant will need to submit an operational statement that includes how the pre-packed meals will be prepared, maintained, served and stored. Contact the Consumer Food Protection Program at (559) 600-3357 for more information. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant will be required to submit complete food facility plans and specifications to the Fresno County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division, for review and approval. The applicant shall apply for and obtain perm its to operate a food facility from the Fresno County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division. A permit, once issued, is nontransferable. Contact the Consumer Food Protection Program at (559) 600-3357 for more information. 3. Prior to alcohol sales, the applicant shall first obtain their license to sell alcoholic beverages. Contact the California Alcoholic Beverage Control Department at (559) 225-6334 for more information 4. Facilities that use and/or store hazardous materials and/or hazardous wastes shall meet the requirements set forth in the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), Division 20, Chapter 6.95, and the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Division 4.5. Your proposed business will handle hazardous materials and/or hazardous waste and will be required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan pursuant to the HSC, Division 20, Chapter 6.95 (http://cers.calepa.ca.gov/). Contact the Fresno County Hazmat Compliance Program at (559) 600-3271 for more information. 5. The proposed project has the potential to expose nearby residents to elevated noise levels. Consideration should be given to your City’s municipal code. 6. As a measure to protect ground water, all water wells and/or septic systems that exist or have been abandoned within the project area should be properly destroyed by an appropriately licensed contractor. Page 2 7. Should any underground storage tank(s) be found during the project, the applicant shall apply for and secure an Underground Storage Tank Removal Permit from the Fresno County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division. Contact the Fresno County Hazmat Compliance Program at (559) 600-3271 for more information. Plan Review Team Land Management PGEPlanReview@pge.com Pacific Gas and Electric Company P.O. Box 0000 City, State, Zip Code PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 1 Public December 12, 2022 Robert Holt City of Fresno 2600 Fresno St Fresno, CA 93721 Re: Living Spaces Furniture Showroom 7354 Abby Street, Fresno, CA 93720 Dear Robert Holt, Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the subject plans. The proposed Living Spaces Furniture Showroom is within the same vicinity of PG&E’s existing facilities that impact this property. PG&E operates underground electric distribution facilities within an easement on this property as indicated on the project plans. Said easement was recorded at 1997-093313 of Fresno County records. PG&E’s easement prohibits the erection or construction of any buildings or structures within the easement area. The proposed signage, bio-retention area, and overhang are in conflict and impact PG&E’s easement area. Please contact PG&E’s Service Planning department at www.pge.com/cco for any modification or relocation requests, or for any additional services you may require. For distribution easement quitclaims, please contact the PG&E Fresno Land office at LandServReqFresno@pge.com. Please note, quitclaim requests are considered on a case-by-case basis and are not guaranteed. You may also contact the Building and Renovation Center (BRSC) for facility map requests by calling 1-877-743-7782. As a reminder, before any digging or excavation occurs, please contact Underground Service Alert (USA) by dialing 811 a minimum of 2 working days prior to commencing any work. This free and independent service will ensure that all existing underground utilities are identified and marked on-site. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact me at alexa.gardea@pge.com. Sincerely, Alexa Gardea Land Management 916-760-5738 December 15, 2022 Robert Holt City of Fresno Department of Planning 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Project: Living Spaces Furniture Showroom - P22-04122 District CEQA Reference No: 20221588 Dear Mr. Holt: The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the Development Permit (DP) referenced above from the City of Fresno (City). Per the DP, the project consists of constructing a 105,000 square foot furniture showroom building (Project). The Project is located at 7354 N. Abby St. in Fresno CA. The District offers the following comments regarding the Project: Project Related Emissions At the federal level under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the District is designated as extreme nonattainment for the 8 -hour ozone standards and serious nonattainment for the particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) standards. At the state level under California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the District is designated as nonattainment for the 8 -hour ozone, PM10, PM2.5 standards. The District’s initial review of the Project concludes that emissions resulting from construction and/or operation of the Project may exceed any of the following significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts: https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf . The District recommends that a more detailed preliminary review of the Project be conducted for the Project’s construction and operational emissions. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 Construction Emissions The District recommends, to reduce impacts from construction-related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available off-road construction equipment, including the latest tier equipment. Operational Emissions Operational (ongoing) air emissions from mobile sources and stationary sources should be analyzed separately. For reference, the District’s significance thresholds are identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts: https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf . Recommended Mitigation Measure: At a minimum, project related impacts on air quality should be reduced to levels of significance through incorporation of design elements such as measures that reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMTs), and measures that increase energy efficiency. More information on transportation mitigation measures can be found at: http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/Mitigation -Measures.pdf. Recommended Model for Quantifying Air Emissions Project-related criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operational sources should be identified and quantified. Emissions analysis should be performed using the California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod), which uses the most recent CARB-approved version of relevant emissions models and emission factors. CalEEMod is available to the public and can be downloaded from the CalEEMod website at: www.caleemod.com. Health Risk Screening/Assessment The City should evaluate the risk associated with the Project for sensitive receptors (residences, businesses, hospitals, day-care facilities, health care facilities, etc.) in the area and mitigate any potentially significant risk to help limit exposure of sensitive receptors to emissions. To determine potential health impacts on surrounding receptors (residences, businesses, hospitals, day-care facilities, health care facilities, etc.) a Prioritization and/or a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) should be performed for the Pro ject. These health risk determinations should quantify and characterize potential Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) identified by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment/California Air Resources Board (OEHHA/CARB) that pose a present or potential hazard to human health. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 Health risk analyses should include all potential air emissions from the project, which include emissions from construction of the project, including multi-year construction, as well as ongoing operational activities of the project. Note, two common sources of TACs can be attributed to diesel exhaust emitted from heavy-duty off-road earth moving equipment during construction, and from ongoing operation of heavy-duty on-road trucks. Prioritization (Screening Health Risk Assessment): A “Prioritization” is the recommended method for a conservative screening -level health risk assessment. The Prioritization should be performed using the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) methodology. The District recommends that a more refined analysis, in the form of an HRA, be performed for any project resulting in a Prioritization score of 10 or greater. This is because the prioritization results are a conservative health risk representation, while the detailed HRA provides a more accurate health risk evaluation. To assist land use agencies and project proponents with Prioritization analyses, the District has created a prioritization calculator based on the aforementioned CAPCOA guidelines, which can be found here: http://www.valleyair.org/busind/pto/emission_factors/Criteria/Toxics/Utilities/PRIORI TIZATION-CALCULATOR.xls Health Risk Assessment: Prior to performing an HRA, it is strongly recommended that land use agencies/ project proponents develop and submit for District review a health risk modeling protocol that outlines the sources and methodologies that will be used to perform the HRA. This step will ensure all components are addressed when performing the HRA. A development project would be considered to have a potentially significant health risk if the HRA demonstrates that the project-related health impacts would exceed the District’s significance threshold of 20 in a million for carcinogenic risk, or 1.0 for either the Acute or Chronic Hazard Indices. A project with a significant health risk would trigger all feasible mitigation measures. The District strongly recommends that development projects that result in a significant health risk not be approved by the land use agency. The District is available to review HRA protocols and analyses. For HRA submittals please provide the following information electronically to the District for review: HRA (AERMOD) modeling files HARP2 files Summary of emissions source locations, emissions rates, and emission factor San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 4 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 calculations and methodologies. For assistance, please contact the District’s Technical Services Department by: E-Mailing inquiries to: hramodeler@valleyair.org Calling (559) 230-5900 Recommended Measure: Development projects resulting in TAC emissions should be located an adequate distance from residential areas and other sensitive receptors in accordance to CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective located at https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf. Ambient Air Quality Analysis An Ambient Air Quality Analysis (AAQA) uses air dispersion modeling to determine if emissions increases from a project will cause or contribute to a violation of State or National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The District recommends an AAQA be performed for the Project if emissions exceed 100 pounds per day of any pollutant. An acceptable analysis would include emissions from both project-specific permitted and non-permitted equipment and activities. The District recommends consultat ion with District staff to determine the appropriate model and input data to use in the analysis. Specific information for assessing significance, including screening tools and modeling guidance, is available online at the District’s website: www.valleyair.org/ceqa. Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement Criteria pollutant emissions may result in emissions exceeding the District’s significance thresholds, potentially resulting in a significant impact on air quality. When a project is expected to have a significant impact, the District recommends the environmental review also include a discussion on the feasibility of implementing a Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement (VERA) for this Project. A VERA is a mitigation measure by which the project proponent provides pound -for- pound mitigation of emissions increases through a process that develops, funds, and implements emission reduction projects, with the District serving a role of administrator of the emissions reduction projects and verifier of the successful mitigation effort. To implement a VERA, the project proponent and the District enter into a contractual agreement in which the project proponent agrees to mitigate project specific emissions by providing funds for the District’s incentives programs. The funds are disbursed by the District in the form of grants for projects that achieve emission reductions. Thus, project-related impacts on air quality can be mitigated. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 5 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 Types of emission reduction projects that have been funded in the past include electrification of stationary internal combustion engines (such as agricultural irrigation pumps), replacing old heavy-duty trucks with new, cleaner, more efficient heavy-duty trucks, and replacement of old farm tractors. In implementing a VERA, the District verifies the actual emission reductions that have been achieved as a result of completed grant contracts, monitors the emission reduction projects, and ensures the enforceability of achieved reductions. After the project is mitigated, the District certifies to the Lead Agency that the mitigation is completed, providing the Lead Agency with an enforceable mitigation measure demonstrating that project-related emissions have been mitigated. To assist the Lead Agency and project proponent in ensuring that the environmental document is compliant with CEQA, the District recommends the environmental document includes an assessment of the feasibility of implementing a VERA. Vegetative Barriers and Urban Greening There are businesses located north and south of the Project. The District suggests the City consider the feasibility of incorporating vegetative barriers and urban greening as a measure to further reduce air pollution exposure on sensitive receptors (e.g., businesses). While various emission control techniques and programs exist to reduce air quality emissions from mobile and stationary sources, vegetative barriers have been shown to be an additional measure to potentially reduce a population’s exposure to air pollution through the interception of airborne particles and the update of gaseous pollutants. Examples of vegetative barriers include, but are not limited to the following: trees, bushes, shrubs, or a mix of these. Generally, a higher and thicker vegetative barrier with full coverage will result in greater reductions in downwind pollutant concentrations. In the same manner, urban greening is also a way to help improve air quality and public health in addition to enhancing the overall beautification of a community with drought tolerant, low-maintenance greenery. Clean Lawn and Garden Equipment in the Community Since the Project consists of commercial development, gas-powered commercial lawn and garden equipment have the potential to result in an increase of NOx and PM2.5 emissions. Utilizing electric lawn care equipment can provide residents with immediate economic, environmental, and health benefits. The District recommends the Project proponent consider the District’s Clean Green Yard Machines (CGYM) program which provides incentive funding for replacement of existing gas powered lawn and garden equipment. More information on the District CGYM program and funding can be found at: http://www.valleyair.org/grants/cgym.htm and http://valleyair.org/grants/cgym-commercial.htm. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 6 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 On-Site Solar Deployment It is the policy of the State of California that renewable energy resources and zero - carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045. While various emission control techniques and programs exist to reduce air quality emissions from mobile and stationary sources, the production of solar energy is contributing to improving air quality and public health. The District suggests that the City consider incorporating solar power systems as an emission reduction strategy for the Project. Electric Vehicle Chargers To support and accelerate the installation of electric vehicle charging equipment and development of required infrastructure, the District offers incentives to public agencies, businesses, and property owners of multi-unit dwellings to install electric charging infrastructure (Level 2 and 3 chargers). The purpose of the District’s Charge Up! Incentive program is to promote clean air alternative-fuel technologies and the use of low or zero-emission vehicles. The District recommends that the City and project proponents install electric vehicle chargers at project sites, and at strategic locations. Please visit www.valleyair.org/grants/chargeup.htm for more information. District Rules and Regulations The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes. The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: www.valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 7 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 District Rules 2010 and 2201 - Air Quality Permitting for Stationary Sources Stationary Source emissions include any building, structure, facility, or installation which emits or may emit any affected pollutant directly or as a fugitive emission. District Rule 2010 (Permits Required) requires operators of emission sources to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO) from the District. District Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review) requires that new and modified stationary sources of emissions mitigate their emissions using Best Available Control Technology (BACT). This Project may be subject to District Rule 2010 (Permits Required) and Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review) and may require District permits. Prior to construction, the Project proponent should submit to the District an application for an ATC. For further information or assistance, the project proponent may contact the District’s SBA Office at (559) 230-5888. District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR) The Project is subject to District Rule 9510 because it will receives a project- level discretionary approval from a public agency and will equal or exceed 2,000 square feet of commercial development. The purpose of District Rule 9510 is to reduce the growth in both NOx and PM emissions associated with development and transportation projects from mobile and area sources; specifically, the emissions associated with the construction and subsequent operation of development projects. The ISR Rule requires developers to mitigate their NOx and PM emissions by incorporat ing clean air design elements into their projects. Should the proposed development project clean air design elements be insufficient to meet the required emission reductions, developers must pay a fee that ultimately funds incentive projects to achieve off-site emissions reductions. Per Section 5.0 of the ISR Rule, an Air Impact Assessment (AIA) application is required to be submitted no later than applying for project -level approval from a public agency. As of the date of this letter, the District has not received an AIA application for this Project. Please inform the project proponent to immediately submit an AIA application to the District to comply with District Rule 9510. One AIA application should be submitted for the entire Project. It is preferable for the applicant to submit an AIA application as early as possible in the City’s approval process so that proper mitigation and clean air design under ISR can be incorporated into the City’s analysis. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 8 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 Information about how to comply with District Rule 9510 can be found online at: http://www.valleyair.org/ISR/ISRHome.htm. The AIA application form can be found online at: http://www.valleyair.org/ISR/ISRFormsAndApplications.htm. District staff is available to provide assistance with determining if the Project OR future development projects will be subject to Rule 9510, and can be reached by phone at (559) 230-5900 or by email at ISR@valleyair.org. District Rule 9410 (Employer Based Trip Reduction) The Project may be subject to District Rule 9410 (Employer Based Trip Reduction) if the project would result in employment of 100 or more “eligible” employees. District Rule 9410 requires employers with 100 or more “eligible” employees at a worksite to establish an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (eTRIP) that encourages employees to reduce single - occupancy vehicle trips, thus reducing pollutant emissions associated with work commutes. Under an eTRIP plan, employers have the flexibility to select the options that work best for their worksites and their employees. Information about District Rule 9410 can be found online at: www.valleyair.org/tripreduction.htm. For additional information, you can contact the District by phone at 559 -230- 6000 or by e-mail at etrip@valleyair.org District Rule 4002 (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) In the event an existing building will be renovated, partially demolished or removed, the Project may be subject to District Rule 4002. This rule requires a thorough inspection for asbestos to be conducted before any regulated facility is demolished or renovated. Information on how to comply with District Rule 4002 can be found online at: http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/asbestosbultn.htm. District Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings) The Project may be subject to District Rule 4601 since it may utilize architectural coatings. Architectural coatings are paints, varnishes, sealers, or stains that are applied to structures, portable buildings, pavements or curbs. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings. In addition, this rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup and labeling requirements. Additional information on how to comply with District San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 9 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 Rule 4601 requirements can be found online at: http://www.valleyair.org/rules/currntrules/r4601.pdf District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) The project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities. Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). Also, should the project result in the disturbance of 5- acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional information regarding the written notification or Dust Control Plan requirements, please contact District Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950. The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at: https://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/forms/DCP-Form.docx Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at: http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/pm10/compliance_pm10.htm Other District Rules and Regulations The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations). San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 10 of 10 District Reference No: 20221588 December 15, 2022 District Comment Letter The District recommends that a copy of the District’s comments be provided to the Project proponent. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Patrick Chimienti by e-mail at patrick.chimienti@valleyair.org or by phone at (559) 230-6139. Sincerely, Brian Clements Director of Permit Services For: Mark Montelongo Program Manager Exhibit I CITY OF FRESNO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Prepared by: LSA 2565 Alluvial Avenue, Suite 172 Clovis, CA 93611 Attachments: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix G/Initial Study for a Mitigated Negative Declaration This page intentionally left blank 1 APPENDIX G/INITIAL STUDY FOR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Environmental Checklist Form for: Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 1. Project title: Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 3. Contact person and phone number: Robert Holt, Supervising Planner City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (559) 621-8056 4. Project location: 7354 N Abby St, Fresno, CA 93720: Southeast of intersection of East Alluvial Avenue and North Abby Street (APN: 303-201-27) 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Brian Saltikov Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Boulevard La Mirada, CA 90638 6. General & Community plan land use designation: General Plan planned land use designation: Commercial – Regional Community Plan: Woodward Park Community Plan 7. Zoning: CR/UGM/cz (Commercial Regional/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning) 8. Description of project: Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 was filed on behalf of Living Spaces (Project Applicant). The following section describes the proposed Living Spaces Fresno Project (proposed project). 2 Existing Conditions The project site is an approximately 8-acre site located in the City of Fresno. Figure 1 shows the site’s regional and local context. The project site is surrounded by commercial uses to the north, commercial/office uses to the east (across from State Route 41[SR 41]), commercial uses to the south and commercial and residential uses to the west along with Pinedale Elementary School in the nearby vicinity. Figure 2 depicts an aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding land uses. The project site is primarily vacant, with the exception of two concrete utility structures located on the southwest corner and the central portion of the project site respectively. The project site also contains subsurface utility infrastructure. Chain link fencing currently bounds the project site’s northern, eastern, and southern boundaries. Project Characteristics The proposed project would include the construction of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom in the eastern portion of the project site, associated parking on the western portion and along the northeast boundary of the site, and utility infrastructure. Figure 3 shows the proposed site plan for the project. The main entrance to the facility would be 16 feet wide, located on the western end of the store facing the parking lot. The facility has three additional 3-foot doorways, two of which would function as emergency exits. The proposed retail store would include an 81,608 square-foot showroom. The proposed facility would also include a 4,682 square-foot stockroom and attached loading zone for delivery vehicles and customer pick up in the northeast corner, a 2,892 square-foot playroom for children, a 672 square-foot employee breakroom, a 412 square-foot conference room, a 478 square-foot prep kitchen, a 175 square-foot storage room for janitorial supplies, a cashier station, restrooms, and other administrative and utility rooms. The proposed project would also include a 320 square-foot café that would offer pre- packaged food, beer, and wine for sale (Conditional Use Permit No. P22-04472 would be filed in conjunction with this project to allow for on-site alcohol sales). Figure 4 shows the layout plan for the proposed furniture retail store. Figures 5 and 6 show the proposed elevations of the furniture retail store. The proposed project would introduce approximately 6.9 acres of impervious surfaces to the project site. The proposed project would remove an approximately 105-foot- long portion of the existing chain link fence and curb and gutter in the northeast corner of the project site to improve fire protection vehicle and delivery vehicle access, and would remove an approximately 46-foot-long portion of the existing chain link fence and curb and gutter along the northwest boundary of the project site to create a vehicle ingress and egress driveway that would cross the adjacent commercial development north of the site and connect to proposed driveways along East Alluvial Avenue. The project would preserve the remaining chain-link fence bordering the project site’s northern, eastern, and southern boundaries. Operation 3 The proposed project would operate Monday through Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and employ approximately 85 staff members. Access, Circulation and Parking The proposed project would include 298 parking stalls, including 30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls, seven Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant parking stalls and 36 clean air/ vanpool parking stalls. The proposed project would also include a 30-by- 60-foot delivery vehicle loading zone in the northeast corner of the proposed retail facility. The proposed project would also provide five long term bicycle parking stalls. Vehicle access to the project site would be provided through one 30-foot-wide vehicle ingress and egress driveway along North Abby Street and one 30-foot-wide ingress and egress driveway located along the northwest boundary of the site; this driveway would connect to the adjacent commercial development north of the site and provide access for vehicles entering through, or exiting towards, one 30-foot-wide ingress and egress driveway and one 15-foot egress driveway along East Alluvial Avenue. All project driveways would be stop-controlled. Circulation within the project site would be provided by a network of approximately 30-foot drive aisles. Pedestrian circulation for the proposed project would occur through an existing pedestrian sidewalk along the project’s frontage with North Abby Street and through internal pedestrian sidewalks and walkways in the project site. Landscaping The proposed project would include approximately 36,648 square feet of landscaping along the perimeter of the site and within the project site. Approximately 93 percent of landscaped areas provided would be shaded by trees. The proposed project would remove two existing trees located along the project site’s northern boundary. Figure 7 shows the proposed landscape plan for the project. Utilities and Infrastructure • Water and Wastewater. Water supply and wastewater services for the proposed project would be provided by the Pinedale County Water Services District. Existing water connection lines currently underly the project site and connect to existing an existing water main in North Abby Street. The proposed project would maintain current water connections, with the exception of one connection located along the site’s northern boundary and install additional 2- inch water lines to improve water distribution and circulation in the project site. Additionally, existing sanitary sewer connection lines currently underly the project site and connect to an existing wastewater line on North Abby Street. The proposed project would remove most of the existing wastewater connections within the project site but would keep the direct connection line with the wastewater main on North Abby Street. The project would construct new 6-inch internal wastewater connections lines that would connect with the existing line connected to the main on North Abby Street. 4 • Stormwater. The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) would provide flood control and urban storm water services to the project site. The project site contains existing surface drainage infrastructure, including storm drain inlets, manholes and catch basins. The proposed project would remove the existing private drainage infrastructure on the project site and would install new surface and subsurface drainage infrastructure (e.g., manholes, catch basins, drain inlets and drainage lines) to direct stormwater towards infrastructure along the site’s southern boundary and west of the site in North Abby Street, where it would be redirected towards nearby ponding basin CN (Basin CN). The proposed project would also include the installation of bioretention areas along the site’s eastern boundary, within the parking lot area, and along the entrance of the proposed retail facility. • Electricity and Natural Gas. Electricity and natural gas services to the site are provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). The project site currently contains a PG&E easement and a PG&E concrete utility structure in the central portion of the project site that would be removed. The project would connect to existing service lines in the vicinity of the project site. • Fire Protection. The proposed retail facility would include a fire sprinkler system and an associated fire sprinkler riser room. The proposed project would include the installation of 3 fire hydrants and 8-inch fire service lines along the perimeter of the retail facility that would provide water supplies for fire protection services. Additionally, a fire department connection would be constructed adjacent to the retail store’s western side, near the main entrance. Dedicated fire lanes would be constructed throughout the perimeter of the proposed retail store and along main circulation driveways within the project site. • Lighting. The proposed project would include the installation of new exterior lighting, with the installation of approximately 37 new lights along the western side of the proposed retail store near the main entrance, within the parking lot area, and along sections of the project site’s northern, western, and southern boundaries. • Solid Waste. The proposed project would include a vertical cardboard baler on-site which would create 1,000-pound bales of cardboard. The proposed project would also include an Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) foam melting machine to condense waste EPS foam into blocks for recycling. Both recycled cardboard bales and EPS foam blocks would be returned to Project Applicant’s distribution centers via delivery trucks and would be sold as raw material for recycled goods. Grading and Construction Construction of the proposed project is expected to occur over a period of 10 months 5 starting in June 2023. Site preparation would include removal of existing utility infrastructure, rocks, debris, and vegetation from the project site. Construction of the proposed project would comply with City standards, including the City’s current building code, landscape standards, and lighting standards. In addition, the project site would be graded similar to other developments throughout the City. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Planned Land Use Existing Zoning Existing Land Use North Commercial - Regional CR - Commercial Regional General Heavy Commercial East Employment - Office O - Office Office/Commercial South Commercial - Regional CR - Commercial Regional General Heavy Commercial West Corridor/Center Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use General Heavy Commercial/Medium Density Residential 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): • Planning and Development Department; • Building & Safety Services Division; • Department of Public Works; • Department of Public Utilities; • County of Fresno, Department of Public Health; • City of Fresno Fire Department; • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District; and • San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? The State requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native 6 American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)). According to the most recent census data, California is home to 109 currently recognized Indian tribes. Tribes in California currently have nearly 100 separate reservations or Rancherias. Fresno County has a number of Rancherias such as Table Mountain Rancheria, Millerton Rancheria, Big Sandy Rancheria, Cold Springs Rancheria, and Squaw Valley Rancheria. These Rancherias are not located within Fresno city limits. Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC Section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. Currently, the Table Mountain Rancheria Tribe and the Dumna Wo Wah Tribe have requested to be notified pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52). A certified letter was mailed to the above-mentioned tribes on March 14, 2023. The 30-day comment period ended on April 13, 2023. Neither tribe requested consultation. NPoplarAveW Bedford Ave W Fa l lb r oo k A v eWNeesAve NMaroaAveNMaroaAveW P in e d a l e A v e W B e e c hw oo d A v e W H e r n d o n A v e W M i n a r e t s A v e W Fi r A v e E N e e s AveEElPasoAveE E l P a s o A v eNFresnoStNSanPabloAve E A l lu v ia l A v eNMariposaStNAngusStENeesAveNBlackstoneAve N1stStYosemiteFwy Riv er P ark Cr os s ing Riv er Par kPlaza River P ar k NFresnoStNFresnoStNHowardStW S i e r r a A v e E S i e r r a A v e E M a g i l l A v eNAbbyStNSanPabloAve NClarkAveNEffieStNCallischAveNAnnaStNAngusStW F i r A v e NAugustaStAlaskaNBlackstoneAveN1stStE H e r n d o n Ave YosemiteFwyFres n o M edical CenterPinedaleÃÃ41 SOURCE: Esri Streets (2022) J:\LSP2201\GIS\Pro\Living Spaces Fresno Project\Living Spaces Fresno Project.aprx (12/8/2022) FIGURE 1 Living Spaces Fresno Project M A D E R A C O U N T Y F R E S N O C O U N T Y ÃÃ145 ÃÃ168ÃÃ180 ÃÃ41 ÃÃ99 Project Vicinity 0 500 1000 FEET Project Location Fresno City Limit Regional Project Location Project Location -©-►CO>clV—iU□=~]i jcjSSs,UUgMHii^3Z3RinnnJUUUUIpnnn,;SfJfiultao3^nr43sn^rl M-HUuu HHfj^HT- 7[]r iLScPW\£_________ Yosemite FwyYosemite FwyE Alluvial AveE Alluvial Ave E Alluvial AveN Abby StN Abby StW Minarets AveW Minarets Ave W Alluvial AveW Alluvial Ave W Spruce AveW Spruce Ave N Blackstone AveN Blackstone AveW El Paso AveW El Paso Ave E El Paso A ve N Fresno StN Fresno StN F r e s n o S t N Howard StN Howard StH e r n don AveN Sugarpine AveN Sugarpine AveW Beechwood AveW Beechwood Ave Yosemite FwyE Alluvial Ave E Alluvial AveN Abby StW Minarets Ave W Alluvial Ave W Spruce Ave N Blackstone AveW El Paso Ave E El Paso A ve N Fresno StN F r e s n o S t N Howard StH e r n don AveN Sugarpine AveW Beechwood Ave PINEDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL COMMERCIAL KAISER PERMANENTE FRESNO MEDICAL CENTER COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIALRESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL 41 3000 150 Project Site Boundary FEET SOURCES: Google Earth, 6/9/2022; LSA, 2022 I:\LSP2201\G\Aerial Photo of Site&Surrounding LU.ai (12/9/2022) FIGURE 2 Living Spaces Fresno Project Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses.: . • ' 'ico3~>1£s.L2—«, 1a . a♦itirttWSifS—5-• '.'1=0* *,::•#= -l.fv * • •ffi«L, •;r»3^™*%■iS£4w,***»*&SeIfiElmei9 ( .-m*113i* * m stx■■K*•*»(i«!> ««■*•!atsusta iis» ■! "»■<' ■TldlJlJj.lW** • ■ fea§(*t*t' ••* •’it.'Vf ><(,?«;•■:**•£•« V* *»•» • v. .;*? . ••• V• «-*r'»* **V *9*• **r#*•*rs^'■i-.IMf1-!.m■fi5 fear-a1N.B i*3:- «—«• * ••*e-*ist 4^*i./»_»«SKSi•-•a-*-Zi NOT TO SCALESOURCE: KTGY Architecture + Planning, 2022I:\LSP2201\G\Site Plan.ai (1/19/2023)FIGURE 3Living Spaces Fresno ProjectSite PlanMINARETS AVEnYSCOPE OF WORKRRE HYDRANT REFER TO CM. CRAWNGSFO CONNECTIONPROPERTY LiltPATHOFTRAVRV'APN 303-02-75<-------<-*JU. — —-**-Hmis—^|T—PROPOSED BUILDING | OTAL AREA: 104,305 SFh^ --LSA KIDS ROOMCASHIERCASHIT ROOMKID'S RR 2KID'S RR 1UPSFIRE RISERPREP KITCHENELEC. RMRECEIVINGJANITOR/STORAGEEMPLOYEE RRBREAK ROOMCONFERENCEREVIVEYOUTH101B102B102C101C107121120102F102D102E112102A113A113C101A106105118116115108117SHOWROOMELECTRICALRM.ELECTRICALRM.109110111111A113B114A114B6' - 0"26'-7"CAFEELEMENTS29' - 4 1/2"6' - 0"114' - 4"6' - 0"123' - 2"6' - 0"6'-0"75'-7"8'-0"88'-11"6'-0"43'-43/4"RUGCHAIR WALLSLAT WALLSLAT WALLELEMENTSOUTDOORBEDROOMBEDROOMBEDROOMBEDROOMBEDROOM0312BALERNOT TO SCALELEGENDFLOOR DRAIN1iWINDOW TAGDOOR TAGWALL TAG1 HR RATED WALL, REFER TO WALL TYPES.ROOM NAMEROOM TAGROOM #ROOM SQUARE FOOTAGEXXKNOXBOXKEYNOTEHOSE BIBLINE ABOVE CANOPY OR SOFFIT, REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLANSMETAL STUD WALL, REFER TO WALL TYPES.SOURCE: KTGY Architecture + Planning, 2022I:\LSP2201\G\Layout of Furniture Retail Store.ai (1/19/2023)FIGURE 4Living Spaces Fresno ProjectLayout of Furniture Retail Store■~ ~anciHiSoif ' fejiCDLSA 32' - 6"34' - 6"0' - 0"22' - 0"20'-0"33' - 6"26' - 0"42' - 0"12'-1"14'-2"20'-0"8'-6"32' - 6"0' - 0"0' - 0"15' - 0"33' - 6"34' - 6"22' - 0"32' - 6"0' - 0"20'-0"14' - 0"32' - 6"42' - 0"0' - 0"15' - 0"NOT TO SCALESOURCE: KTGY Architecture + Planning, 2022I:\LSP2201\G\ElevaƟons of Furniture Retail Store-N&E.ai (1/19/2023)FIGURE 5Living Spaces Fresno ProjectElevaƟons of Furniture Retail Store - North and East ElevaƟonsK T.O. PARAPET-H B=taNORTH ELEVATION - Bs T.O. PARAPETNORTH ELEVATION - A '[•> T.O. PARAPETT.O. PARAPETT.O. PARAPET0. CMU WALLEAST ELEVATIONLSA 34' - 6"0' - 0"32' - 6"42' - 0"32' - 6"32' - 6"34' - 6"22' - 0"T.O PARAPETB.O CANOPYT.O PARAPETT.O PARAPETT.O PARAPETT.O PARAPETF.F.22' - 0"T.O PARAPET20'-0"32' - 6"34' - 6"32' - 6"0' - 0"T.O PARAPETT.O PARAPETT.O PARAPET26' - 0"22' - 0"0' - 0"B.O CANOPYF.FT.O PARAPET33' - 6"T.O PARAPET7'-7"3'-11"18'-0"4'-0"20'-0"8'-6"0' - 0"32' - 6"34' - 6"0' - 0"33' - 6"6'-7"3'-11"18'-0"4'-0"26' - 0"22' - 0"NOT TO SCALESOURCE: KTGY Architecture + Planning, 2022I:\LSP2201\G\ElevaƟons of Furniture Retail Store-S&W.ai (1/19/2023)FIGURE 6Living Spaces Fresno ProjectElevaƟons of Furniture Retail Store - South and West ElevaƟons$---------------------1 1 1 11 ^-----------------»$------------------------------------«SOUTH ELEVATION - B ^dVl-.O PARAPETSOUTH ELEVATION -A 24^ ' ' ' 1l— -L— JJ'rWFST FI FVATION -jLSA 80040FEETSOURCE: O’Dell Engineering, 2022I:\LSP2201\G\Landscape Plan.ai (1/19/2023)FIGURE 7Living Spaces Fresno ProjectLandscape PlanMa r/ Hrj,r^ J^LII* •.Donc; ^u uuPLANT LEGENDSYMBOL BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEQUANTITYWATER USEAPPROX.SPACINGCOMMENTS/NOTESDETAILREFERENCETREESACE RUBACER RUBRUM ’OCTOBER GLORY’OCTOBER GLORY RED MAPLE 24" BOX 28 MODERATE PER PLANF&B, FGR, HI BR. MATCH 1&2/ L4.0LAG MUS LAGERSTROEMIA X ’MUSKOGREE' LIGHT LAVENDER CRAPE MYRTLE15 GAL 2LOWPER PLANF&B, FGR, PURPLE FLW. HI BR, MATCH1&2/ L4.0QUE PYRQUERCUS ROBUR 'PYRAMICH'SKYMASTER ENGLISH OAK 15 GAL 67 LOW PER PLANF&B, FGR, HI BR. MATCH1&2/ L4.0ULM PAR ULMUS PARVIFOLIA LACEBARK ELM24"BOX 73MODERATE PER PLAN F&B, FGR, HI BR. MATCH 1&2/ L4.0SHRUBS©CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER'FEATHER REED GRASS 1 GAL 56LOW48"BIOSWALE, F&B, MATCH, TRI SP3&4/ L4.0©CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM ’EL CAMPO'CAPE RUSH 1 GAL 42 LOW36"BIOSWALE. F&B. MATCH. TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0@CISTUS X PURPUREUS ORCHID ROCKROSE 5 GAL 91 LOW42"F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©COTONEASTER DAMMERI ’LOWFAST'LOWFAST BEARBERRY COTONEASTER1 GAL 272 LOW36’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0®DIETES BICOLORFORTNIGHT ULY5 GAL 639 LOW36’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©GREVILLEA X ’NOELLII' GREVILLEA 5 GAL 29 LOW42*F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 'BRAKELIGHTS'BRAKELIGHTS RED YUCCA 1 GAL 62 LOW30’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©LEYMUS TRIT1COIDES 'GREY DAWN'GREY CREEPING WILD RYE 1 GAL 93 LOW36"BIOSWALE, F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©JUNCUS PATENSCALIFORNIA GRAY RUSH1 GAL 260 MODERATE30’BIOSWALE. F&B. MATCH. TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM 'TEXANUM'WAX LEAF PRIVET5 GAL14 LOW42’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASS 1 GAL 118 LOW36’BIOSWALE, F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ’PUTAHCREEK’PUTAH CREEK TRAILINGMYOPORUM1 GAL 365 LOW36’F&B, MATCH. TRI SP 3&4/ L4.00PRUNUS CAROUNIANA 'BRIGHT 'N TIGHT"BRIGHT 'N TIGHT CAROLINA LAUREL15 GAL 133LOW54’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0®RHAPHIOLEPIS UMBELLATA 'MINOR'YEDDA HAWTHORN5 GAL 360LOW42’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP3&4/ L4.0©ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS'DWARF ROSEMARY1 GAL 222LOW36’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©TEUCRIUM FRUTICANS 'AZUREUM'AZURE BUSH GERMANDER 1 GAL 64 LOW36’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP3&4/ L4.0®TULBAGHIA VIOLACEA 'VARIEGATA'STRIPED CAPE GARUC1 GAL 422LOW30’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP3&4/ L4.0®XYLOSMA CONGESTUM 'COMPACTA'COMPACT XYLOSMA5 GAL 23LOW42’F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0©ZAUSCHNERIA CAUFORNICACALIFORNIA FUCHSIA 1 GAL41 LOW36"F&B, MATCH, TRI SP 3&4/ L4.0VINES-FICUS PUMILA CREEPING FIG 5 GAL 10 MODERATE PER PLANF&B, MATCH, TTW5/ L4.0MISCELLANEOUSROOT BARRIER DEEPROOT UB24-2. OR EQUAL. 3,276 LFDEEPROOT OR EQUAL. WWW.DEEPROOT.COM,P: (800) 458-7668.6/ L4.03’ DEPTH COBBLE MULCH4,793 SF8/ L4.012" WIDE CONCRETE CURB244 LF7/ L4.0PLANT LIST ABBREVIATIONSBR GR BRANCHED TO GROUND DV DWARF VARIETYF&B FULL DENSE. BUSHY, VIGOROUS PLANTS, WITH YOUNG GROWTH CLOSELY SPACED ON BRANCHESFGR FREE OF GIRDLING ROOTS FLW FLOWER GAL GALLON CAN HI BR HIGH BRANCHED LO BR LOW BRANCHEDMATCH MATCHED SIZE, FORM, CALIPER,BRANCHING AND CUITIVAR. SELECT FROM ONE LOT, ONE GROWER, FOR GUARANTEED CONSISTENCY THROUGH LIFE OF PLANTS. IN GENERAL PLANTS WITHIN A GROUP OR AREA ARE TO BE MATCHEO, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEMULTI MULTI STEMMEDSL SINGLE, STRAIGHT, DOMINANT LEADERTRI SP TRIANGULARLY SPACEDTTW TRAIN TO WALLVAR VARIEGATED SPECIESTREE CALLOUT. /-----TREE SPECIES\i*l£SLCONTAINER SIZE QUANTITYLSA 14 This page intentionally left blank 15 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ☐ Air Quality ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Energy ☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Noise ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Public Services ☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Wildfire ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ___ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. _X_ 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 (EIR) 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 EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ___ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable 16 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. ___________________________________________________________________ Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Date EVALUATION OF ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT ASSESSED IN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH NO. 2019050005 PREPARED FOR THE APPROVED FRESNO GENERAL PLAN (GP PEIR): 1. For purposes of this Initial Study, the following answers have the corresponding meanings: a. “No Impact” means the specific impact category does not apply to the project, or that the record sufficiently demonstrates that project specific factors or general standards applicable to the project will result in no impact for the threshold under consideration. b. “Less Than Significant Impact” means there is an impact related to the threshold under consideration, but that impact is less than significant. c. “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation” means there is a potentially significant impact related to the threshold under consideration, however, with the mitigation incorporated into the project, the impact is less than significant. For purposes of this Initial Study “mitigation incorporated into the project” means mitigation originally described in the GP PEIR and applied to an individual project, as well as mitigation developed specifically for an individual project. d. “Potentially Significant Impact” means there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant related to the threshold under consideration. 2. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 3. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 4. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, 17 then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 5. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from, "Earlier Analyses," as described in (6) below, may be cross-referenced). 6. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, Program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the PEIR or another earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 7. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 8. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 18 This page intentionally left blank 19 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in PRC Section 21099, would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock out- croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X DISCUSSION a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? A scenic vista is generally defined as a public vantage point with an expansive view of a significant landscape feature. An impact on scenic vistas is considered significant if it substantially diminishes, blocks, or impedes an expansive view of a significant landscape feature from a public vantage point. The City of Fresno contains views of highly valued features such as the San Joaquin River, Sierra Nevada Mountain foothills, and buildings in Downtown Fresno. Figure POSS-2 in the Fresno General Plan has 20 identified six vista points along the San Joaquin River bluff.1 The project site is located in a developed area of the City of Fresno and is not located in an area with expansive or far field views. The proposed project would include the construction of a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure. The project site is bounded by commercial uses to the north, south, and east, and by commercial and residential uses to the west. There are no significant trees, rock outcroppings, and/or historic buildings located on the subject property that have been identified as important scenic resources or would otherwise constitute significant landscape features. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially diminish any scenic vistas within or near the project area and would likewise not substantially block or impede surrounding views. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and no mitigation is required. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no trees, rock outcroppings, and/or historic buildings located on the subject property that have been identified as important scenic resources in the Fresno General Plan, General Plan PEIR or Municipal Code, or would otherwise constitute significant landscape features. Additionally, there are no officially-designated State Scenic Highways in the immediate vicinity of the project site. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) mapping of State Scenic Highways,2 the County of Fresno has one officially designated State Scenic Highways located along State Route (SR-) 180, east of the City of Fresno and approximately 21 miles southeast of the project site. Three eligible State Scenic Highways are also located within the County of Fresno, the nearest of which is located along SR-168 east of the City of Clovis, approximately 4.6 miles southeast from the project site. None of these are in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Since there are no eligible or officially designated State Scenic Highways within the immediate vicinity of the project site, the project would not impact a designated State Scenic Highway. Furthermore, the eligibility of the three State Scenic Highways, scenic resources located within the highway segments or its viewshed would not be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, no impact on scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway would occur as a result of the proposed project. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or 1 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. Chapter 5: Parks, Open Space, and Schools. Figure POSS-2: San Joaquin River Parkway Path & Trail Access Points. pg.5-19. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/General-Plan-5-Parks-Open-Space-and-Schools-7-19.pdf (accessed January 2023). 2 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Mapping of State Scenic Highways. Website: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic- highways (accessed December 2022). 21 quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? The proposed project would alter the existing visual character of the project site from vacant to developed with a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure. As identified above, nearby parcels consist of commercial and residential uses. Although the proposed project would change the visual characteristics of the project site by developing the site, the design of the project would be consistent with the visual character within the project area. The project site is zoned in the City’s Commercial – Regional (CR) District, which is intended to meet local and regional retail demand, such as large-scale retail, office, civic and entertainment uses, shopping malls with large-format or “big-box” retail, and supporting uses such as gas stations and hotels. The proposed project would introduce uses compatible with the zoning of the project site.3 Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the existing zoning of the site and would not conflict with any applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality. In addition, the project design would be subject to the City’s Design Guidelines adopted for the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code which apply to site layout, building design, landscaping, interior street design, lighting, parking and signage. Detailed architectural plans, color palettes and building materials as well as landscaping plans would be submitted by the project developer to the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department prior to issuance of any building permits. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the visual character of the area and would not diminish the visual quality of the area, as they would be consistent with the existing visual setting. The proposed project itself is not visually imposing against the scale of the existing adjacent uses and nature of the surrounding area. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with the site’s zoning or with regulations governing scenic quality. A less-than-significant impact would occur. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The project site is in a primarily urbanized area, which is subject to preexisting exterior lighting from surrounding development and existing street lighting. Construction of the proposed project would include temporary light and glare resulting from construction activities that could adversely affect day or nighttime views. 3 City of Fresno. 2016. Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15: Citywide Development Code. Table 15-1202: Land Use Regulations—Commercial Districts. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Complete_Code_March_2017.pdf (Accessed December 2022). 22 Construction could result in light and glare from construction vehicles or equipment; however, construction activities are anticipated to occur primarily during daylight hours and once construction is completed, light and glare from these activities would cease to occur. As described in the Project Description, the proposed project would include new on-site exterior lighting, with the installation of approximately 37 new lights along the western side of the proposed retail store near the main entrance, within the parking lot area, and along sections of the project site’s northern, western, and southern boundaries. Nighttime lighting levels would increase over current levels in the project area, associated with parking lot lights and security-related lighting. While compliance with California Building Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations [CCR]) standards would minimize the proposed project’s light and glare impacts, the proposed project’s lighting systems could constitute substantial new sources of light relative to baseline conditions if the project’s lighting systems are significantly more intense than existing lighting sources or if they are not appropriately shielded to prevent light diffusion. Additionally, the proposed project could create a substantial new source of glare if highly reflective building materials are used. The new lighting and structures that would be constructed as part of the proposed project would be comparable to those of other commercial uses in the vicinity of the project site. Although potential light and glare from the proposed project could affect operation of vehicles on SR 41, located east of the project site, implementation of applicable lighting standards established in the Fresno Municipal Code and implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-4, described below, would reduce potentially significant effects. All exterior lighting at the project site would be pointed downward toward the project site to minimize spillover of light outside the project site’s property line. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with Article 25, Performance Standards, of the Municipal Code, which includes standards related to lighting and glare. Further, implementation Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2 would ensure that the proposed project’s lighting systems do not create a substantial new source of light by requiring shielding mechanisms to direct light away from nearby uses. As a result, any new sources of light resulting from the proposed project would not be substantial in the context of existing lighting sources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-3 would ensure that the proposed project’s lighting systems do not create a substantial new source of light by imposing a cap on the intensity of lighting systems based on the average intensity of the surrounding streets. Additionally, while the project does not propose use of highly reflective glass elements or building materials, Mitigation Measure AES-4 requires materials used on building façades to be non-reflective. Therefore, any new source of glare would not be substantial. Accordingly, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-4, the 23 project’s potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure AES-1: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. Mitigation Measure AES-2: Lighting systems for non-residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. Mitigation Measure AES-3: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. Mitigation Measure AES-4: Materials used on building facades shall be non- reflective. 24 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farm- land), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monito- ring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X 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))? X d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X 25 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non- forest use? X DISCUSSION a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? The project site is located within an urbanized area of Fresno, surrounded by commercial uses to the north, commercial/office uses to the east (across from SR 41), commercial uses to the south, and commercial and residential uses to the west. The project site is classified as Urban and Built-Up Land by the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)4. There are no agricultural production uses located within or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not convert agricultural land to a non- agricultural use. The proposed project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use and, no impact would occur. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? The project site is zoned in the City’s Commercial – Regional (CR) district and designated Commercial – Regional in the Fresno General Plan. The project site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, resulting in no impact. 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 4 California Department of Conservation. 2016. California Important Farmland Finder. Available online at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (Accessed December 2022). 26 (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? The project site is located within an existing urban area and is zoned within the Commercial – Regional (CR) district within the City of Fresno. The project site is not currently used for timberland production, nor is it zoned for forest land or timberland. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to 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)), and no mitigation is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? The project site is located in an existing urban area and is currently vacant. There is no existing forest land within the project site, and the site is not zoned as forest land. The proposed project would not convert forest land to non-forest use and would result in no impact to the loss or conversion of forest land to a non-forest use, and no mitigation is required. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Please refer to discussions a) and c) of this section. The project site is located within an existing urban environment and would not result in the conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses or forest land to non-forest uses. Therefore, the project would not result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use, or conversion of forest land to non-forest use would occur, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources, and no mitigation is required. 27 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (e.g., by having potential emissions of regulated criterion pollutants which exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Districts (SJVAPCD) adopted thresholds for these pollutants)? X b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? X DISCUSSION a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The City of Fresno is part of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB), which is within the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). The 28 SJVAPCD is responsible for air quality regulation within the eight-county San Joaquin Valley region. Both the State and the federal government have established health-based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead, and suspended particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10). The SJVAB is designated as non-attainment for O3 and PM2.5 for federal standards and non-attainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for State standards. CEQA requires that certain proposed projects be analyzed for consistency with the applicable air quality plan. An air quality plan describes air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or region classified as a non-attainment area. The main purpose of the air quality plan is to bring the area into compliance with the requirements of the federal and State air quality standards. To bring the SJVAB into attainment, the SJVAPCD adopted the 2022 Plan for the 2015 8-Hour Ozone Standard in December 2022 to satisfy Clean Air Act requirements and ensure attainment of the 70 parts per billion (ppb) 8-hour ozone standard. To ensure the SJVAB’s continued attainment of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) PM10 standard, the SJVAPCD adopted the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan in September 2007. SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) is designed to reduce PM10 emissions generated by human activity. The SJVAPCD adopted the 2018 plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 standards to address the USEPA federal annual PM2.5 standard of 12 µg/m3, established in 2012. For a project to be consistent with SJVAPCD air quality plans, the pollutants emitted from a project should not exceed the SJVAPCD emission thresholds or cause a significant impact on air quality. In addition, emission reductions achieved through implementation of offset requirements are a major component of the SJVAPCD air quality plans. As discussed below in discussion b), and as shown in Table 1, construction of the proposed project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would further reduce construction dust impacts. Additionally, as shown in Table 2, long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project, including area, energy, and mobile source emissions, would also not exceed SJVAPCD established significance thresholds. Therefore, impacts related to the proposed project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan would be less than significant with mitigation. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? The SJVAB is designated as non-attainment for O3 and PM2.5 for federal standards and non-attainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for State standards. The SJVAPCD’s non- 29 attainment status is attributed to the region’s development history. Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in non-attainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant. Short-Term Construction Emissions. During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions generated by grading, paving, building, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, NOx, reactive organic gases (ROG), directly emitted particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and toxic air contaminants (TACs) such as diesel exhaust particulate matter. Project construction activities would include site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities. Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site. Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. The SJVAPCD has implemented Regulation VIII measures for reducing fugitive dust emissions (PM10). With the implementation of Regulation VIII measures, fugitive dust emissions from construction activities would not result in adverse air quality impacts. In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, ROG, and some soot particulate (PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles idle in traffic. These emissions would be temporary in nature and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site. The SJVAPCD has established construction emissions thresholds on an annual basis as shown in Table 1 below. Construction emissions for the proposed project were analyzed using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1. 30 Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to begin in June 2023 and continue for a period of 10 months. This analysis assumes the use of Tier 2 construction equipment. Construction of the proposed project would include the export of 5,999 cubic yards of material, which is included in this analysis. Other precise details of construction activities are unknown at this time; therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction worker and truck trips and fleet activities) from CalEEMod were used. Construction- related emissions are presented in Table 1. CalEEMod output sheets are included in Appendix A. Table 1: Project Construction Emissions (Tons per Year) Construction Year ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 2023 0.1 1.7 1.3 <0.1 0.2 0.1 2024 0.3 0.6 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Maximum Annual Construction Emissions 0.3 1.7 1.3 <0.1 0.2 0.1 SJVAPCD Significance Threshold 10.0 10.0 100.0 27.0 15.0 15.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Source: LSA (February 2023). CO = carbon monoxide NOX = nitrogen oxides PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size ROG = reactive organic gas SJVAPCD = San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SOX = sulfur oxides As shown in Table 1, construction emissions would not exceed the SJVAPCD threshold for annual construction emissions for the proposed project. In addition to the construction period thresholds of significance, the SJVAPCD has implemented Regulation VIII measures for dust control during construction. These control measures are intended to reduce the amount of PM10 emissions during the construction period. Implementation of the fugitive dust control measures outlined in Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would ensure that the proposed project complies with Regulation VIII and further reduces the short-term construction period air quality impacts. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, construction of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS. Long-Term Operational Emissions. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts associated with the proposed project are those related to mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), energy sources (e.g., electricity and natural gas), and area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment). PM10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement and the vehicle wakes generate airborne dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small 31 compared to the other PM emission processes. Gasoline-powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions compared with diesel-powered vehicles. Energy source emissions result from activities in buildings for which natural gas is used. The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e., the amount of natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source. Typically, area source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions located at the project site, including architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment. Area source emissions associated with the project would include emissions from the use of landscaping equipment and the use of consumer products. Emission estimates for operation of the proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod. Model results are shown in Table 2. Trip generation rates for the proposed project were based on the project’s trip generation estimate, as identified in Section XVII, Transportation. As discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, the proposed project would generate approximately 311 average daily trips. The primary emissions associated with the proposed project are regional in nature, meaning that air pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release or, in the case of vehicle emissions associated with the proposed project; emissions are released in other areas of the Air Basin. The annual emissions associated with project operational trip generation, energy, and area sources are identified in Table 2. Table 2: Project Operation Emissions (Tons per Year) ROG NOX CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Mobile Source Emissions 0.2 0.2 1.3 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 Area Source Emissions 0.5 <0.1 0.4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Energy Source Emissions <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Total Project Operation Emissions 0.7 0.3 1.7 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 SJVAPCD Significance Threshold 10.0 10.0 100.0 27.0 15.0 15.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Source: LSA (February 2023). CO = carbon monoxide NOX = nitrogen oxides PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size ROG = reactive organic gas SJVAPCD = San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SOX = sulfur oxides The results shown in Table 2 indicate the proposed project’s operational emissions would not exceed the significance criteria for annual CO, NOx, ROG, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the proposed project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS. As a result, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. 32 c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Sensitive receptors are defined by the SJVAPCD as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants.5 Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units. The nearest sensitive receptors include single-family residences located approximately 65 feet west of the project site across North Abby Street. Construction of the proposed project may expose surrounding sensitive receptors to airborne particulates, as well as a small quantity of construction equipment pollutants (i.e., usually diesel-fueled vehicles and equipment). However, construction contractors would be required to implement measures to reduce or eliminate emissions by following the Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions as required by Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Project construction emissions would be below the SJVAPCD significance thresholds. Once the proposed project is constructed, the proposed project would not be a significant source of long-term operational emissions. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project operation. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site would create localized odors. These odors would be temporary and are not likely to be noticeable for extended periods of time beyond the project site. The potential for diesel odor impacts is therefore considered less than significant. In addition, the proposed uses that would be developed within the project site are not expected to produce any offensive odors that would result in frequent odor complaints. The proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during project construction or operation, and this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), the following controls are required to be included as specifications for the proposed project and implemented at the construction site: • All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable 5 SJVAPCD, 2015. Final Draft -- Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. February 19. 33 cover or vegetative ground cover. • All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. • When materials are transported off site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden). • Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of out-door storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. 34 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X 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 US Fish and Wildlife Service? X 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? X 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? X 35 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X 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? X DISCUSSION LSA conducted a Biological Resources Assessment (BRA)6 to assess potential impacts of the proposed project on biological resources (included as Appendix B). The following summarizes the resources and methods used to assess the project site, and findings of the BRA. Environmental Setting. The project site lies within the San Joaquin Valley, is flat with little topographic variation and is at approximately 352 feet above mean sea level in elevation. There are no drainage features, depressional wetlands, or riparian areas present in the project site or immediate surroundings. The project site is currently undeveloped and contains one transformer/pad and a fire hydrant from the previous development. According to historic aerial imagery, the project site was previously developed as Boomers Park (a family entertainment park) from approximately 1998 to 2017. In 2017, Boomers Park was demolished/cleared and the site has remained in its current condition since 2017. Adjacent parcels consist of North Abby Street to the west, a Kohl’s department store to the north, SR 41 to the east, and a Home Depot store to the south. Some lands in the vicinity of the project site are fallow/vacant lots; however, most of the lands are developed with a mixture of commercial developments, schools, and residential uses. There are no undisturbed open spaces in the vicinity of the project site. The vegetation existing on the site appears to be regularly maintained. There are a few small and immature Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta; non-native species) and interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni) trees located along the fence line of the southern perimeter of the project site. 6 LSA, 2023. Biological Resources Assessment for the Proposed Living Spaces Project located in City of Fresno, Fresno County, California. March 8. 36 Literature Review and Records Search. A literature review and records search was conducted on January 18, 2023, to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special-status plant and animal species in the project vicinity. Database records reviewed included the following: • California Natural Diversity Data Base information (CNDDB – RareFind 5), which is administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), formerly known as the California Department of Fish and Game. This database covers sensitive plant and animal species, as well as sensitive natural communities that occur in California. Records from nine USGS quadrangles surrounding the project area (Gregg, Lanes Bridge, Friant, Herndon, Fresno North, Clovis, Malaga, Fresno South and Kearney Park), along with a query of records within a 5-mile radius of the project site, were obtained from this database to inform the field survey. • California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants, which uses four specific categories or “lists” of sensitive plant species to assist with the conservation of rare or endangered botanical resources. Records from the nine USGS quadrangles surrounding the project site were obtained from this database to inform the field survey. • United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Online System, which lists all proposed, candidate, threatened, and endangered species managed by the Endangered Species Program of the USFWS that have the potential to occur on or near a particular site. This database also lists all designated critical habitats, national wildlife refuges, and migratory birds that could potentially be impacted by activities from a proposed project. An IPaC Trust Resource Report (USFWS 2023a) was generated for the project site. • Designated and Proposed USFWS Critical Habitat Polygons were reviewed to determine whether critical habitat has been designated or proposed within or in the vicinity of the project site (USFWS 2023b). • The USFWS National Wetlands Inventory was reviewed to determine whether any wetlands or surface waters of the United States have been previously identified in the survey area (USFWS 2023c). • eBird: eBird is a real-time, online checklist program launched in 2002 by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society. It provides rich data sources for basic information on bird abundance and distribution at a variety of spatial and temporal scales. eBird occurrence records within the project sites and a 5-mile radius around the project site were reviewed in January 2023 (eBird 2023). In addition to the databases listed above, historic and current aerial imagery, as well as local land use policies related to biological resources were reviewed, including Fresno General Plan Policies POSS-5-a through POSS-5-g, POSS-6-a and POSS-6-b which relate to protection and conservation of sensitive and special-status habitats and species in the Planning Area, and Fresno Municipal Code Article 23, Landscape, which describes the City’s tree protection guidelines, tree removal permit and application 37 requirements. Field Investigation. A general biological survey of the project site was conducted by an LSA Biologist on January 19, 2023. The project site was surveyed on foot, and all biological resources observed were noted and mapped. Findings. The project site is strictly upland in nature with dominant vegetation consisting of disturbed non-native grassland. Ongoing soil disturbance and the resulting competitive exclusion by invasive nonnative plants limit the potential for native flora to occur in the project site. No native or special-status vegetation communities exist in the project site. No riparian habitat exists in the project site or on adjacent parcels and there are no depressional wetlands (e.g., vernal pools) or natural drainage features within the project site. The project site does not serve as a wildlife nursery or as a wildlife migration corridor. A total of seven wildlife species were observed on or near the project site during the January 2023 survey, including: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris; nonnative species), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). Each of the wildlife species observed commonly occur in and around developed areas throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Migratory bird species may utilize the project site for foraging; however, the usage is likely transient and limited to species that forage over open areas. The literature review identified 14 special-status plant species that are known to occur within a nine-quad radius of the project site. However, based on site observations coupled with the habitat suitability analysis, no special-status plant species are expected to occur within the project site. It is also unlikely that any source populations exist in adjacent or nearby parcels. While no special-status animal species (or signs of such species) were observed on site during the January 2023 survey, California ground squirrel burrows that could be used by burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) were observed in portions of the project site. None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey, although there is some potential for use by this species in the future. Potentially significant direct and/or indirect impacts, including mortality, harassment, or other forms of incidental take, could occur if construction-related ground disturbance occurs in or around an occupied burrow. While only limited habitat for tree, shrub and ground-nesting birds exists on the project site, birds using the project site and immediate surroundings could be subjected to indirect disturbances during construction. Nesting birds are protected under the 38 California Fish and Game Code. Construction activities that occur during the nesting bird season (typically February 15 through September 15) have potential to result in the direct or indirect take of nesting birds. 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 Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The project site is located in City of Fresno, is approximately 8 acres in size, and is currently vacant and disturbed. The project site is surrounded by commercial and residential uses. The project site does not contain critical habitat that could support candidate, sensitive or special-status species. Furthermore, no special-status species have been identified within the project site or in the vicinity of the site. However, the project site has limited nesting habitat for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). As such, project implementation could potentially impact burrowing owl. If unmitigated or unavoidable, these potential impacts on burrowing owl could be considered potentially significant. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which would require conducting pre-construction surveys and implementing measures such as avoidance, den excavation and passive relocation, would prevent or compensate for impacts on special-status species. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 related to 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 Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Habitat values of the urban site have been severely diminished due to periodic site disturbance, scarcity of vegetation, and perimeter chain-link fencing. Review of historic and current aerial imagery of the project area, as well as the field survey conducted at the project site for the BRA determined that no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulation by the CDFW or United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) are present on the site.7 Designated critical habitat, sensitive natural communities, and other sensitive habitats are absent from the project site and adjacent lands. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant 7 LSA, 2023. Biological Resources Assessment for the Proposed Living Spaces Project located in City of Fresno, Fresno County, California. March 8. 39 impact related to a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No aquatic resources occur within the project site, or within the vicinity of the project site. As a result, no impact would occur related to a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The project site does not contain any features that would function as wildlife movement corridors for resident or migratory wildlife species. Additionally, existing chain-link fencing surrounding the project site limits the movement of wildlife species on the site. However, the project site does contain suitable nesting habitat for a few urban adapted native avian species. The on-site Mexican fan palms and interior live oaks trees have the potential to support a variety of tree-nesting birds, while existing burrows on the site have the potential to support ground-nesting birds such as the burrowing owl. Nearly all native birds are protected by the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the California Migratory Bird Protection Act, and the California Fish and Game Code. Construction activities that occur during the nesting bird season (typically February 15 through September 15) have potential to result in the mortality/disturbance of nesting birds. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which requires preparation of a burrowing owl preconstruction survey, establishing buffers and avoidance of active nests, would effectively mitigate any impacts on burrowing owls to less-than-significant levels. Additionally, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires conduction of a pre- construction survey prior vegetation removal and construction occurring during bird nesting season (February 15 through September 15), as well as implementation of buffer zones around active nests, the proposed project would have a less-than- significant impact related to substantially interfering with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impeding 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? 40 Although the proposed project is subject to provisions of the City’s Municipal Code regarding trees on public property (Article 3 of Chapter 13 of the City of Fresno Municipal Code), the proposed project does not conflict with any of the existing ordinances related to tree preservation and protection. The two existing trees to be removed from the project site do not fall under the category of “Protected Trees” as defined in Section 15-2308 (C) of the Municipal Code. Additionally, the Project Applicant would comply with the requirements of the tree removal permit application as required by the City. Furthermore, the BRA prepared for the proposed project assessed the proposed project’s compliance with Fresno General Plan policies related to protection of biological resources, and determined that the project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. As a result, no impact would occur related to 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? The PG&E San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) was approved in 2007 and covers portions of nine counties, including Fresno County. This HCP covers PG&E activities which occur as a result of ongoing O&M that would have an adverse impact on any of the 65 covered species and provides incidental take coverage from the USFWS and CDFW. The City of Fresno Planning Area is not located within the boundaries of any approved or draft Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other adopted local, regional or state HCP. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of the PG&E O&M HCP, or any other an adopted HCP or NCCP and the proposed project and would have no impact. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure BIO-1: A preconstruction clearance survey shall be required for burrowing owl no more than 30 calendar days prior to initiation of project activities. All survey results shall be delivered to the City of Fresno. If an active burrowing owl burrow is found within the project site, the Project Applicant shall coordinate with CDFW to obtain applicable agency approval/direction prior to any ground disturbance activities on the site. Specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW. If no active burrowing owl burrows are identified, project activities may proceed as planned following the preconstruction survey. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: If vegetation removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to occur within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through 41 September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than 5 days prior to the start of such activities. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by project-related activities such as noise, vibration, increased human activity, and dust, etc. For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active by the qualified biologist. Documentation of all survey results shall be provided to the City. 42 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? X c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X DISCUSSION A Cultural Resources Survey8 was prepared for the proposed project by LSA Associate/Senior Archaeologist Kerrie Collison, M.A., Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) No. 28731436 (included as Appendix C). The Cultural Resources Survey included: (1) a records search at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) to identify prior cultural resource studies and previously recorded cultural resources in the project area and surrounding 0.5-mile area; (2) a search of the NAHC’s Sacred Lands File; (3) additional background research including a review of aerial photographs and historic- period maps that include the project site; and (4) a pedestrian field survey of the project area to identify potential historical resources within the project area. The analysis in this Cultural Resources section is based on the results of the Cultural Resources Survey. a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? A historical resource defined by CEQA includes one or more of the following criteria: (1) the resource is listed, or found eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources; (2) listed in a local register of historical resources as defined by Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k); (3) identified as significant in a historical resources survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); or 4) determined to be a historical resource by the project’s lead agency (PRC Section 21084.1; State 8 LSA, 2023. Cultural Resources Survey Study for the Living Spaces Project in Fresno, Fresno County, California (LSA Project No. LSP2201). March 7. 43 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.(a)). Under CEQA, historical resources include built- environment resources and archaeological sites. As discussed in the Cultural Resources Survey, no historical resources were identified within or adjacent to the project site. The project site has remnant fire hydrants and utility access boxes leftover from a previous use (Boomers Park) that has since been removed from the project site. Boomers Park was constructed between 1984 and 1998 and as such, does not represent a historical resource. Additionally, the field survey conducted at the project site did not identify archeological resources on-site. Although the project site is disturbed and no evidence of archeological deposits has been identified, there is a potential for unknown archaeological resources that qualify as a historical resource under CEQA to be discovered during construction. In addition, the City has determined that impacts to cultural resources could occur as a result of development within the City, and that unknown archaeological materials constituting historical resources have the potential to be present. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 requires that if unknown historical resources are discovered during construction, work in the area would halt, and a qualified historical resources professional would be contacted and consulted regarding how to appropriately address the situation. This would minimize or eliminate any potential for a change to the significance of any discovered resources. Therefore, adherence to the requirements in Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts related to a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 to less than significant with mitigation. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? According to the State CEQA Guidelines, “When a project will impact an archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is an historical resource” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(1)). Those archaeological sites that do not qualify as historical resources shall be assessed to determine if these qualify as “unique archaeological resources” (California PRC Section 21083.2). A records search prepared for the project’s Cultural Resources Survey identified that seven previously conducted cultural resources studies that included the project site or land within a 0.5-mile of the project site did not identify and record any significant historical or archeological resources. Additionally, in the February 10, 2023 archeological field survey conducted at the project site, an LSA archaeologist did not identify archeological resources on-site. However, as identified in the Fresno General Plan, there is potential for unknown archaeological resources to be discovered during project construction. Mitigation Measure CUL-2 requires that if unknown archaeological resources are discovered during construction of the proposed project, work in the area would halt and a qualified archaeologist would be consulted. Therefore, adherence to the requirements in Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to less than significant. 44 c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Disturbance of human remains interred outside of formal cemeteries would result in a significant impact. If human remains are identified during project construction, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code shall apply, as appropriate. In addition, the project would comply with Mitigation Measure CUL-3, which requires notifying the County Coroner and other relevant parties in the event that human remains are found during construction of the proposed project. Therefore, adherence to the requirements in Mitigation Measure CUL- 3 would reduce potential impacts to unknown human remains to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the nature and significance of the find and determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources pursuant to California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(f))., including but not limited to collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. 45 If determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist, archaeological monitoring shall commence and continue until grading and excavation are complete or until the monitoring archaeologist determines, based on field observations and in consultation with the qualified archaeologist, that there is little likelihood of encountering additional archaeological cultural resources. Archaeological monitoring may be reduced from full-time to part-time or spot-checking if determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist based on monitoring results. Upon completion of any monitoring activities, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of monitoring activities. The final version of this report shall be submitted to the SSJVIC. If the found resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long- term preservation to allow future scientific study. Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. 46 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VI. ENERGY – Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? X b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X DISCUSSION a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? The proposed project would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and gasoline. The discussion and analysis provided below is based on data included in the CalEEMod output, which is included in Appendix A. Construction-Period Energy Use. The anticipated construction schedule assumes that the proposed project would be built over approximately 10 months. The proposed project would require grading, site preparation, and building activities during construction. Construction of the proposed project would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of construction materials, preparation of the site for demolition and grading activities, and construction of the proposed building and infrastructure. Petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact during project construction. 47 Operational Energy Use. Energy use consumed by the proposed project would be associated with natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel used for vehicle and truck trips associated with the project. Energy and natural gas consumption was estimated for the project using default energy intensities by land use type in CalEEMod. In addition, the proposed project would result in energy usage associated with gasoline and diesel to fuel project-related trips. Based on the CalEEMod analysis (included in Appendix A), the proposed project would result in approximately 667,848 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per year. The average fuel economy for light‐duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and SUVs) in the United States has steadily increased from about 14.9 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1980 to 22.9 mpg in 2020.9 The average fuel economy for heavy-duty trucks in the United States has also steadily increased, from 5.7 mpg in 2013 to a projected 8.0 mpg in 2021.10 Therefore, using the average fuel economy estimates for 2020 and 2021 the proposed project would result in the consumption of approximately 22,900 gallons of gasoline and 17,872 gallons of diesel. Table 3 shows the estimated potential increased electricity and natural gas demand, and fuel consumption associated with the proposed project. Table 3: Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Project Electricity Use (kWh per year) Natural Gas Use (therms per year) Gasoline Consumption (gallons per year) Diesel Fuel Consumption (gallons per year) 1,210,432 10,269 22,900 17,872 Source: LSA (February 2023). kWh = kilowatt-hours As shown in Table 3, the estimated potential increased electricity demand associated with the proposed project is 1,210,432 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. In 2021, Fresno County consumed 8,378 GWh or 8,378,047,292 kWh.11 Therefore, electricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total electricity demand. The estimated potential increased natural gas demand associated with the proposed project is 10,269 therms per year, as shown in Table 3. In 2021, Fresno County consumed approximately 318 million therms or approximately 318,890,506 therms.12 Therefore, natural gas demand associated with the proposed project would only be less 9 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). “Table 4-23: Average Fuel Efficiency of U.S. Light Duty Vehicles.” Website: https://www.bts.gov/content/average-fuel-efficiency-us-light-duty-vehicles (accessed December 2022). 10 Ibid. 11 California Energy Commission (CEC), 2021a. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Electricity Consumption by County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed December 2022. 12 CEC, 2021b. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Gas Consumption by County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed December 2022). 48 than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total natural gas demand. In addition, the proposed project would result in energy usage associated with gasoline and diesel to fuel project-related trips. As shown above in Table 3, vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would consume approximately 22,900 gallons of gasoline and 17,872 gallons of diesel fuel per year. Based on fuel consumption obtained from EMFAC2021, approximately 157 million gallons of diesel and approximately 372 million gallons of gasoline will be consumed from vehicle trips in Fresno County in 2023. Therefore, vehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and by less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage. In addition, proposed new development would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). The expected energy consumption during construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent with typical usage rates for commercial uses; however, energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings. PG&E is the private utility that would supply the proposed project’s electricity and natural gas services. In 2021, a total of 50 percent of PG&E’s delivered electricity came from renewable sources, including solar, wind, geothermal, small hydroelectric and various forms of bioenergy.13 PG&E reached California’s 2020 renewable energy goal in 2017, and is positioned to meet the State’s 60 percent by 2030 renewable energy mandate set forth in Senate Bill (SB) 100. In addition, PG&E plans to continue to provide reliable service to their customers and upgrade their distribution systems as necessary to meet future demand. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact during project operation. As such, the proposed project would not result in a potential significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. No mitigation is required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? In 2002, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1389, which required the California Energy Commission (CEC) to develop an integrated energy plan every two years for electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels, for the California Energy Policy Report. The plan 13 PG&E, 2021. Exploring Clean Energy Solutions. https://www.pge.com/en_US/about-pge/environment/what- we-are-doing/clean-energy-solutions/clean-energy-solutions.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_cleanenergy (accessed December 2022). 49 calls for the State to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To further this policy, the plan identifies a number of strategies, including assistance to public agencies and fleet operators in implementing incentive programs for zero emission (ZE) vehicles and their infrastructure needs, and encouragement of urban designs that reduce VMT and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access. The most recently CEC adopted energy reports are the 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report14 and 2022 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update15. The Integrated Energy Policy Reports provide the results of the CEC’s assessments of a variety of energy issues facing California. Many of these issues will require action if the State is to meet its climate, energy, air quality, and other environmental goals while maintaining energy reliability and controlling costs. The Integrated Energy Policy Reports cover a broad range of topics, including implementation of Senate Bill 350, integrated resource planning, distributed energy resources, transportation electrification, solutions to increase resiliency in the electricity sector, energy efficiency, transportation electrification, barriers faced by disadvantaged communities, demand response, transmission and landscape-scale planning, the California Energy Demand Preliminary Forecast, the preliminary transportation energy demand forecast, renewable gas (in response to Senate Bill 1383), updates on Southern California electricity reliability, natural gas outlook, and climate adaptation and resiliency. As indicated above, the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact to regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with California’s energy conservation plans as described in the CEC’s Integrated Energy Policy Reports. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to energy, and no mitigation is required. 14 California Energy Commission, 2021. 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report. California Energy Commission. Docket # 21-IEPR-01. 15 California Energy Commission, 2022. 2022 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update. California Energy Commission. Docket # 22-IEPR-01. 50 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: a) Directly or Indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. X ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X 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? X 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? X 51 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? X f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X DISCUSSION a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Fault rupture is generally expected to occur along active fault traces that have exhibited signs of recent geological movement (i.e., 11,000 years). Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones delineate areas around active faults with potential surface fault rupture hazards that would require specific geological investigations prior to approval of certain kinds of development within the delineated area. The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. In addition, no known active or potentially active faults or fault traces are located in the project vicinity. As a result, the proposed project would have no impact related to 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 would occur. No mitigation is required. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? The City of Fresno is located in an area with historically low to moderate level of seismicity. However, strong ground shaking could occur within the project site during seismic events and occurrences have the possibility to result in 52 significant impacts. Major seismic activity along the nearby Great Valley Fault Zone or the Nunez Fault, or other associated faults, could affect the project site through strong seismic ground shaking. Strong seismic ground shaking could potentially cause structural damage to the proposed project. However, due to the distance to the known faults, hazards due to ground shaking would be minimal. In addition, compliance with the California Building Code (Title 24 CCR) would ensure that geotechnical design of the proposed project would minimize or eliminate potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects related to strong seismic ground shaking. As such, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation is required. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon primarily associated with saturated soil layers located close to the ground surface. During ground shaking, these soils lose strength and acquire “mobility” sufficient to permit both horizontal and vertical movements. Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained sands that lie relatively close to the ground surface. However, loose sands that contain a significant amount of fines (silt and clay) may also liquefy. Based on the predicted seismic accelerations, and soil and groundwater conditions typically encountered in the region, general liquefaction potential is low in the City of Fresno. Additionally, compliance with the Fresno Municipal Code and the California Building Code would ensure potential impacts associated with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects. Therefore, the proposed project’s impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. iv. Landslides? A landslide generally occurs on relatively steep slopes and/or on slopes underlain by weak materials. The project site is located on a relatively flat area and is not located next to any hills. Although there is an existing grade separation between the project site and SR 41 east of the project site, given the distance between SR41 and the property line (approximately 66 feet), the relative slightness of the existing slope and compacted nature of the soil that underlies the highway infrastructure, the project site is not expected to be affected by landslides stemming from this incline. In general, the potential for land sliding or slope failure in Fresno is very low and the project site would not be susceptible to landslides. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects by exposing people or structures to risk as a result of landslides. As such, the proposed project’s impacts would be less than significant. 53 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The total project site is 8 acres, which would be disturbed/developed during proposed grading and construction activities. Grading and earthmoving during project construction has the potential to result in erosion and loss of topsoil. Exposed soils could be entrained in stormwater runoff and transported off the project site. However, this impact would not be substantial because the project is required to comply with water quality control measures, which include preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (refer to Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality). Although designed primarily to protect stormwater quality, the SWPPP would incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion. Additional details regarding the SWPPP are provided in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Initial Study. Impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. 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? As described in discussion a) in this section, soils on the project site would not be subject to liquefaction, lateral spreading, or landslides. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to conform with the California Building Code (CBC), which establishes building and construction design standards and requirements based on project location, proposed occupancy type at the project site, soil characteristics, and other site-specific characteristics. Implementation of the CBC would reduce risks related to unstable soils, including threats to the stability and security of structures and the safety of the people occupying them. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact related to the potential to 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. No mitigation is required. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Expansive soils are characterized by the potential for shrinking and swelling as the moisture content of the soil decreases and increases, respectively. Shrink-swell potential is influenced by the amount and type of clay minerals present and can be measured by the percent change of the soil volume. The project site is made up of San Joaquin loam (SgA), a soil with low to moderate clay content and shrink-swell 54 potential.16 Compliance with the California Building Code requirements, including general building design and construction requirements relating to structural safety in the building foundation and supporting ground would ensure that geotechnical design of the proposed project would reduce potential impacts related to expansive soils to a less- than-significant level. As such, the risk of expansive soil affecting the proposed project is considered low. Impacts to expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. 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? The project site would be served by a wastewater conveyance system maintained by the City of Fresno. Wastewater from the City’s collection system is treated at the City’s wastewater treatment plant. Development of the proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The Fresno General Plan PEIR identifies two primary surficial deposits in the Fresno Planning Area: (1) Pleistocene non‐marine; and (2) Quaternary non‐marine fan deposits. The Pleistocene non‐ marine deposits are considered to have a high potential sensitivity. The Quaternary non‐marine deposits consist of Pleistocene‐Holocene alluvial sediments. Since these deposits include Pleistocene sediments, they are also considered to have a high potential for sensitivity. Therefore, excavation and/or construction activities within the Planning Area that are associated with implementation of the approved Fresno General Plan has the potential to impact paleontological/geological resources during excavation and construction activities within previously undisturbed soils. The records search and field survey prepared for the project’s Cultural Resource Survey did not identify any known paleontological resources or unique geological features within or near the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project would not require excavation to depths that have not already been disturbed by previous construction. In accordance with State law, the proposed project would be required to comply with Section 5097.5 of the California PRC and California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 4307, which state that no person shall remove, injure, deface or destroy any 16 Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. Available online at: https://websoilsurvey. sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed December 2022). 55 object of paleontological, archaeological, or historical interest or value. Penal Code Section 622.5 establishes as a misdemeanor the willful injury, disfiguration, defacement, or destruction of any object or thing of paleontological interest or value, whether situated on private or public lands. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature directly or indirectly. Impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to geology and soils, and no mitigation is required. 56 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X DISCUSSION a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, and are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. However, over the last 200 years, human activities have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global climate change. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are17: • Carbon dioxide (CO2) • Methane (CH4) • Nitrous oxide (N2O) • Hydrofluorocarbons • Perfluorocarbons • Sulfur Hexafluoride Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural 17 City of Fresno, 2021. Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report. pg. 4.8-3. September 30. 57 processes, such as oceanic evaporation. These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), which is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and the length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of each gas is measured relative to CO2, the most abundant GHG; the definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e). The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse GHG emission impact if the project would: • Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reduction the emissions of GHGs. Section 15064.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that: “A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project.” In performing that analysis, the lead agency has discretion to determine whether to use a model or methodology to quantify GHG emissions, or to rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In making a determination as to the significance of potential impacts, the lead agency then considers the extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting, whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project, and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a Statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. Therefore, consistent with the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5, if a project is consistent with an adopted qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy that meets the standards, it can be presumed that the project would not have significant GHG emission impacts. The City of Fresno’s GHG Reduction Plan was adopted in December 2014 to reduce local community GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, consistent with the State objectives set forth in AB 32. The City’s 2014 GHG Reduction Plan meets the requirements for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy and is designed to 58 streamline environmental review of future development projects in the City, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. The City of Fresno updated its 2014 GHG Reduction Plan in the year 2021 (GHG Reduction Plan Update) to conform with existing applicable State climate change policies and regulations to reduce local community GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030, consistent with the State objectives set by SB 32. The GHG Reduction Plan Update outlines strategies that the City will undertake to achieve its proportional share of GHG emission reductions. The GHG Reduction Plan Update includes a Consistency Checklist to help the City provide a streamlined review process for new development projects that are subject to discretionary review pursuant to CEQA. This analysis evaluates the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan Update. The GHG Reduction Plan Update requires an analysis of GHG emissions to ensure that a change in land use designation would not result in a significant increase in GHG emissions compared to the existing land use designation. The proposed project would not require a change in the Fresno General Plan land use designation or the current zoning of the project site and would be consistent with the Fresno General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, an analysis of the proposed project’s estimated GHG emissions compared to maximum buildout of the existing designation would not be required. As stated above, the GHG Reduction Plan Update includes a Consistency Checklist to help the City provide a streamlined review process for new development projects that are subject to discretionary review pursuant to CEQA. The project’s Consistency Checklist is included in Appendix D. As shown in the Consistency Checklist, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable strategies from the GHG Reduction Plan Update. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment and impacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? As described above, the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan Update. Other applicable plans include the SJVAPCD’s Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP), which includes suggested best performance standards (BPS) for proposed development projects. However, the SJVAPCD’s CCAP was adopted in 2009 and was prepared based on the State’s 2020 GHG targets, which are now superseded by State policies (i.e., the 2022 California Green Building Code) and the 2030 GHG targets, established in SB 32. In addition, the proposed project was analyzed for consistency with the goals of Executive Order (EO) B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and the Scoping Plan. 59 EO B-30-15 added the immediate target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in EO B-30-15. CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. SB 32 builds keep the State on the path toward achieving the 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by CARB was posted in December 2016. The Scoping Plan contains GHG reduction measures that work towards reducing GHG emissions, consistent with the targets set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32 and AB 197. The measures applicable to the proposed project include energy efficiency measures, water conservation and efficiency measures, and transportation and motor vehicle measures, as qualitatively discussed below. Energy efficient measures are intended to maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the CCR, established by the CEC, regarding energy conservation and green building standards. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with applicable energy measures. Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, the proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the CCR, which includes a variety of different measures, including reduction of wastewater and water use. In addition, the proposed project would be designed to include drought tolerant landscaping. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the water conservation and efficiency measures. The goal of transportation and motor vehicle measures is to develop regional GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles. The second phase of Pavley standards will reduce GHG emissions from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025, resulting in a 3 percent decrease in average vehicle emissions for all vehicles by 2020. Vehicles traveling to the project site would comply with the Pavley II (LEV III) Advanced Clean Cars Program. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified transportation and motor vehicle measures. 60 As such, the proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in EO B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and would be consistent with applicable plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions, and no mitigation is required. 61 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL – Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X 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? X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X 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? X 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? X 62 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X DISCUSSION a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve the use of limited amounts of potentially hazardous materials, including but not limited to, solvents, paints, fuels, oils, and transmission fluids. However, all materials used during construction would be contained, stored, and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations established by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the USEPA, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The proposed project would include the construction of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store in the eastern portion of the project site, associated parking on the western portion and along the northeast boundary of the site, and utility infrastructure. No uses utilizing large amounts of hazardous materials are anticipated to occur within the project site. Project operation would involve the use of small quantities of commercially available hazardous materials (e.g., paint, cleaning supplies) that could be potentially hazardous if handled improperly or ingested. However, these products are not considered acutely hazardous and are not generally considered unsafe. All storage, and handling occurring during project construction would comply with DTSC, USEPA and OSHA requirements, while routine transport and disposal of hazardous materials during project construction and operation would comply with applicable standards and regulations, including Objective NS‐4, Policies NS‐4‐a through NS‐4‐g, and Policy NS‐4‐i of the Noise and Safety Element of the Fresno General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and no mitigation is required. 63 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? As discussed in discussion a) above, all storage, and handling of hazardous materials occurring during project construction would comply with DTSC, USEPA and OSHA requirements, while routine transport and disposal of hazardous materials during project construction and operation would comply with applicable standards and regulations, including Objective NS‐4, Policies NS‐4‐a through NS‐4‐g, and Policy NS‐4‐i of the Noise and Safety Element of the Fresno General Plan. With implementation of applicable regulations, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to the hazard to the public or the environment through a reasonably foreseeable upset or accident condition related to the release of hazardous materials. This impact would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The closest existing schools include Pinedale Elementary School, located approximately 0.18-mile southwest of the project site, Lincoln Elementary School, located approximately 0.65-mile northeast of the project site, and Kastner Intermediate School, located approximately 0.75-mile northeast of the project site. As previously stated, the project consists of a commercial use that would use small quantities of commercially available hazardous materials that are not generally considered unsafe. The proposed project would not result in the use or emission of substantial quantities of acutely hazardous materials that would pose a human or environmental health risk. In addition, all materials would be handled, stored, and disposed of in accordance with applicable standards and regulations, including DTSC, USEPA and OSHA requirements and Objective NS‐4, Policies NS‐4‐a through NS‐4‐g, and Policy NS‐4‐i of the Noise and Safety Element of the Fresno General Plan. Therefore, because the proposed project does not involve activities that would result in the emission of hazardous materials or acutely hazardous substances, implementation of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No mitigation is required. 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? 64 According to the DTSC EnviroStor database,18 the project site is not located on a federal superfund site, State response site, voluntary cleanup site, school cleanup site, evaluation site, school investigation site, military evaluation site, tiered permit site, or corrective action site. The project site is not included on the list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.19 As a result, no impact related to hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would occur, and no mitigation is required. 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? The nearest airports include the Sierra Sky Airport, located approximately 4.8 miles west of the project site, the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, located approximately 6 miles southeast of the project site, and the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, located approximately 7.9 miles southwest of the project site. In addition, the nearest medical center helipads include the Saint Agnes Medical Center, located 1.22 miles southeast of the project site. The project site is not located within 2 miles of any local airports. Although the project is located within two miles of a hospital heliport, heliport operations are not expected to pose a significant hazard for people in the project area. The project is located in the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan within the boundaries of Fresno Yosemite International Airport, Zone 7 “Precision Approach Zone (PAZ)”. Within Zone 7 (PAZ), there is generally no concern with regard to any object up to 100 feet above ground level (AGL) unless it is located on high ground or it is a solitary object (e.g., an antenna) more than 35 feet AGL.20 The proposed project is located in a generally flat area, and would include a retail facility with a maximum height of 42 feet. Additionally, the proposed facility is located adjacent to existing commercial facilities of similar dimensions, and would not be a solitary object. As such, aircraft operations are not expected to pose a safety hazard to people working or visiting the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No mitigation is required. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The California Emergency Services Act requires cities to prepare and maintain an Emergency Plan for natural, manmade, or war-caused emergencies that result in 18 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2007. EnviroStor. Website: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=fresno (accessed December 2022). 19 California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2018. Government Code Section 65962.5(a) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Website: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/ (accessed December 2022). 20 Fresno Council of Governments, 2018. Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. December. 65 conditions of disaster or in extreme peril to life. The City’s full‐time Emergency Preparedness Officer (EPO) is responsible for ensuring that Fresno’s emergency response plans are up‐to‐date and implemented properly. The EPO also facilitates cooperation between City departments and other local, State and federal agencies that would be involved in emergency response operations. The City of Fresno Emergency Operations Center (EOC) serves as the coordination and communication between the City of Fresno and Fresno County Operational Area EOC. The proposed project would not result in any alterations of existing roadways. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with the implementation of or physically interfere with any adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plan, and this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? Wildland fires occur in geographic areas that contain the types and conditions of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure density susceptible to risks associated with uncontrolled fires that can be started by lightning, improperly managed campfires, cigarettes, sparks from automobiles, and other ignition sources. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) Map for Fresno County, the project site is not located within a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.21 Sparse vegetation does exist between the project site’s eastern boundary and SR 41, which represents limited ignition sources in the project vicinity. Design of project access, internal circulation system, fire lanes and fire suppression features would be developed to City of Fresno standards and conditions of approval requirements. Additionally, the Fresno Fire Department (FFD) would also review the proposed development plans prior to project approval to ensure that adequate emergency access and on-site circulation are provided. Therefore, with implementation of the City’s design requirements and FFD review of project plans, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant loss, injury or death involving wildland fires and the impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, and no mitigation is required. 21 Cal Fire, 2007. Fresno County Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Kune. Available online at: https://osfm. fire.ca.gov/media/6673/fhszl06_1_map10.pdf (accessed November 2022). 66 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? X b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; X ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site: X iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or X iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X 67 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? X DISCUSSION a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? The State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards regulate the water quality of surface water and groundwater bodies throughout California. The proposed project is within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Construction. Pollutants of concern during construction include sediments, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals. During project construction, there would be an increased potential to expose soils to wind and water erosion, which could result in temporary minimal increases in sediment load within nearby water bodies. Because the project would disturb greater than 1 acre of soil, it is required to comply with the State Water Resources Control Board’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWG and 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) (Construction General Permit). The project is also subject to Article 7, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control, Section 6-714, Requirement to Prevent, Control, and Reduce Storm Water Pollutants of the City’s Municipal Code. The Construction General Permit requires the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs). Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, erosion and sediment control, designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site, and good housekeeping practices to prevent spills, leaks, and discharge of construction debris 68 and waste into receiving waters. Section 6-714 of the City’s Municipal Code also requires the implementation of BMPs to the maximum extent technologically and economically feasible to prevent and reduce pollutants from entering stormwater during construction. Therefore, adherence to the required SWPPP and the City’s Municipal Code and implementation of construction BMPs, would reduce the potential for the discharge of pollutants into nearby water bodies during construction and impacts associated with the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. During construction, it is likely that dewatering would be required. If groundwater is encountered during construction, the project would be required to obtain coverage under the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Requirements Limited Threat Discharges to Surface Water (Order R5-2022-0006, NPDES No. CAG995002). With adherence to the Waste Discharge Requirements pertaining to Limited Threat Discharges to Surface Water, project construction would not violate groundwater quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts would be less than significant. Operation. Operation of the proposed project could result in surface water pollution associated with chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and waste that may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to be transported via runoff during periods of heavy precipitation into nearby water bodies. The City of Fresno operates under the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Regional National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements General Permit for Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) (Order No. R5-2016-0040-014, NPDES No. CAS0085324). Consistent with the City of Fresno’s MS4 Permit, the project would implement storm water quality controls recommended in the Fresno-Clovis Storm Water Quality Management Construction and Post-Construction Guidelines. If applicable, the project would also be subject to the Statewide General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities (Order 2014-0057-DWQ as amended in 2015 and 2018) (Industrial General Permit) and would be required to develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan, eliminate non-stormwater discharges, conduct routine site inspections, train employees in permit compliance, sample storm water runoff and test if for pollutant indicators, and submit an annual report to the State Water Resources Control Board. Adherence to the City of Fresno’s MS4 Permit, including implementation of the Stormwater Management Post-Construction Guidelines, as specified in the Industrial General Permit, would reduce the potential for the discharge of pollutants during project operations and impacts associated with the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. 69 Infiltration of stormwater could have the potential to affect groundwater quality. The majority of the project site would be impervious surface; and therefore, it is not expected that stormwater would infiltrate during project operations. Because stormwater would be collected and diverted to the storm drain system, there is not a direct path for pollutants to reach groundwater. Therefore, project operations would not violate groundwater quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts would be less than significant. Conclusion. The proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. Therefore, the project’s impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? The City of Fresno overlies the Kings Subbasin, which is part of the greater San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. Temporary dewatering from excavations could be necessary during construction. Construction-related dewatering would be temporary and limited to the area of excavations on the project site and would not substantially contribute to depletion of groundwater supplies. Operation of the project would not require groundwater extraction. Following project implementation, there would be an increase in impervious surface area. An increase in impervious surface area decreases infiltration, which can decrease the amount of water that is able to recharge the aquifer/groundwater. However, the increase in impervious area at the project site would not substantially decrease any infiltration that currently may occur in the area, as the project would include on-site stormwater infrastructure that would allow infiltration of runoff on-site, and would also collect and direct excess runoff towards inlets west and south of the project site that would direct water towards the City’s drainage basins. Therefore, the project would not impede the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board’s ability to manage groundwater. Thus, this project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project would impede sustainable management of the Kings Subbasin. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Additionally, as discussed below in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems, the City receives its water supply from groundwater and surface water. The City has indicated that groundwater wells, pump stations, recharge facilities, water treatment and distribution systems shall be expanded incrementally to mitigate increased water demands. One of the primary objectives of Fresno’s future water supply plans detailed in the City’s current Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) is to balance groundwater operations through a host of strategies. Through careful planning, Fresno has designed a comprehensive plan to accomplish this objective by increasing surface water supplies and surface water treatment facilities, intentional recharge, and conservation, thereby 70 reducing groundwater pumping. The City continually monitors impacts of land use changes and development project proposals on water supply facilities by assigning fixed demand allocations to each parcel by land use as currently zoned or proposed to be rezoned. The City relies on groundwater and surface water supplies to meet water demands. In 2006, Fresno updated its Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan designed to ensure the Fresno metro area has a reliable water supply through 2050. The plan implements a conjunctive use program, combining groundwater, treated surface water, artificial recharge, and an enhanced water conservation program. The Fresno General Plan policies require the City to maintain a comprehensive conservation program to help reduce per capita water usage, and includes conservation programs such as landscaping standards for drought tolerance, irrigation control devices, leak detection and retrofits, water audits, public education and implementing U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water conservation to maintain surface water entitlements. Implementation of the Fresno General Plan policies, the Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, the City of Fresno UWMP, the Fresno-Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan, and the City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resource Management Plan would address the issues of providing an adequate, reliable, and sustainable water supply for the proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? During construction, excavated soil would be exposed and disturbed, drainage patterns would be temporarily altered, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and sedimentation compared to existing conditions. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate. As discussed previously, the Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP to identify construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the project to reduce impacts to water quality during construction, including those impacts associated with soil erosion and siltation. With compliance with the requirements in the Construction General Permit and implementation of the construction BMPs, and with compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, construction impacts related to on- or off-site erosion or siltation would be less than significant. The project would increase the amount of impervious surface, which would 71 increase the volume of runoff during a storm, and which can more effectively transport sediments to receiving waters. At project completion, much of the project site would be impervious surface area and not prone to on-site erosion or siltation because no exposed soil would be present in these areas. The remaining portion of the site would consist of pervious surface area, which would contain landscaping that would minimize on-site erosion and siltation by stabilizing the soil. Additionally, the Project Applicant would be required to establish and maintain existing drainage patterns. Therefore, the proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in an impact related to substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements would reduce or eliminate the proposed project’s potential to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? During construction, soil would be disturbed and compacted, and drainage patterns would be temporarily altered, which can increase the volume and velocity of stormwater runoff and increase the potential for localized flooding compared to existing conditions. As discussed above, the Construction General Permit requires the preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of construction BMPs to control and direct surface runoff on-site. With adherence to the Construction General Permit, construction impacts related to altering the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on-site or offsite would be less than significant. While the project would permanently increase the impervious surface area, the project would maintain the overall on-site drainage patterns and continue to direct surface water to catch basins that flow into existing storm drains south and west of the site. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant would be required to provide a stormwater improvement plan to the City to ensure that the stormwater system would be capable of handling a 25- year storm and that the drainage facilities conform to City requirements. Additionally, the Project Applicant would be required to pay for all necessary improvement costs if the City determines that the City’s storm drain system or storm drain pumping capacity requires expansion or modification as a result of the project. Therefore, the project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site and impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. 72 iii. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Construction. The proposed project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces given that the project site would be mostly built out aside from planting areas located in the parking lot and the perimeter of the project site. However, compliance with pre-existing regulatory requirements, including compliance with the Construction General Permit and implementation of a SWPPP, would reduce or eliminate the potential for project construction to cause substantial additional polluted runoff or runoff in excess of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Therefore, construction would not result in additional sources of polluted runoff to be discharged to the storm drain system and impacts would be less than significant. Operations. As discussed above, the proposed project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces which would increase the volume of runoff from the project site during a storm. However, compliance with existing regulatory requirements, including the MS4, as specified in the Industrial General Permit, would reduce or eliminate the potential for project operations to cause substantial additional polluted runoff or runoff in excess of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Therefore, project operations would not result in additional sources of polluted runoff to be discharged to the storm drain system and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? The proposed project is not located within the 100-year flood hazard area as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).22 Therefore, the proposed project would not impede or redirect potential flood flows, and the proposed project would have no impact. No mitigation is required. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? The project site is not located in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones. Refer to discussion a) in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials regarding the use of hazardous materials within the project site. As a result, a less-than-significant impact would occur related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones. No mitigation is required. 22 Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2020. FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search By Address. Website: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery#searchresultsanchor (accessed November 2022). 73 e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? The City is located within the Kings Subbasin, which is part of the larger San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The planning documents regarding water resources for the City include the City of Fresno UWMP and the City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan. As noted above, the proposed project would be required to adhere to NPDES drainage control requirements during construction and operation as well as to FMFCD drainage control requirements. As a result, the proposed project would not include any other waste discharges that could conflict with the Basin Plan23. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality, and no mitigation is required. 23 North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, 2020. Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Website: https://northkingsgsa.org/groundwater-sustainability-plan/ (accessed January 2023). 74 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X DISCUSSION a) Physically divide an established community? The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature (such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks) or removal of a means of access (such as a local road or bridge) that would impair mobility within an existing community, or between a community and outlying areas. For instance, the construction of an interstate highway through an existing community may constrain travel from one side of the community to another; similarly, such construction may also impair travel to areas outside of the community. The proposed project would develop the currently vacant project site into a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure. The proposed project would not construct features that would divide an established community or remove means of access that would impair mobility in a community. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to physically dividing an established community, and no mitigation is required. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The project site is designated Commercial – Regional in the Fresno General Plan, which is intended to accommodate large-scale retail development to serve regional demand and zoned in the City’s Commercial – Regional (CR) district, which is intended to meet local and regional retail demand, such as large-scale retail, office, civic and 75 entertainment uses, shopping malls with large-format or “big-box” retail, and supporting uses such as gas stations and hotels. The proposed project would introduce uses compatible with the zoning of the project site, as depicted in Fresno Municipal Code Table 15-1202 (Land Use Regulations, Commercial Districts).24 The project would not require a change the Fresno General Plan land use designation or the current zoning and would be consistent with the Fresno General Plan Land Use Objectives and Policies for commercial development, including Objective LU-6 and Policy LU-6-b, as well as the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and therefore would result in no impact. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to land use and planning, and no mitigation is required. 24 City of Fresno. 2016. Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15: Citywide Development Code. Table 15-1302: Land Use Regulations—Employment Districts. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Complete_Code_March_2017.pdf (accessed December 2022). 76 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X 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? X DISCUSSION 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? The project site is located within an urban area and is currently vacant. There are no known mineral resources within or in the vicinity of the project site. The principal area for mineral resources in the City of Fresno Planning Area is located along the San Joaquin River Corridor. The California Department of Mines and Geology classifies lands along the San Joaquin River Corridor as Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) 1, MRZ 2, and MRZ-3. The project site is not located in the vicinity of the San Joaquin River Corridor and does not contain mineral resources. Furthermore, no mineral extraction operations occur in the project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources, and would result in no impact. No mitigation is required. 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? As shown in the discussion for a), the project site is not located within or in the vicinity of any known mineral extraction operations or near the San Joaquin River Corridor, an area of known mineral resources in the City. As such, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of any known locally important mineral resource recovery sites. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impact. No mitigation is required. 77 Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to mineral resources, and no mitigation is required. 78 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIII. NOISE – Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X DISCUSSION a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards? Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, or sleep. Several noise measurement scales exist that are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement that indicates the relative intensity of a sound. Sound levels in dB are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 dB represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense. 79 Each 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness; and similarly, each 10 dB decrease in sound level is perceived as half as loud. Sound intensity is normally measured through the A-weighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. The A-weighted sound level is the basis for 24-hour sound measurements that better represent human sensitivity to sound at night. As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level would be. Geometric spreading causes the sound level to attenuate or be reduced, resulting in a 6 dB reduction in the noise level for each doubling of distance from a single point source of noise to the noise sensitive receptor of concern. There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq, the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), and the day-night average level (Ldn) based on dBA. CNEL is the time varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale, but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening relaxation hours. CNEL and Ldn are within one dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. The noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. A project would have a significant noise effect if it would substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of applicable regulatory agencies, including, as appropriate, the City of Fresno. The City of Fresno addresses noise in the Noise Element of the Fresno General Plan and in Chapter 10, Article 1 (Noise Regulations), of the Fresno Municipal Code. Listed below are objectives and policies related to noise that are presented in the Noise Element of the Fresno General Plan. In addition, the Noise Element sets noise standards for transportation and stationary noise sources as shown in Table 4 and Table 5, below. 80 Table 4: Transportation (Non-Aircraft) Noise Sources Noise-Sensitive Land Use1 Outdoor Activity Areas2 Interior Spaces Ldn/CNEL, dB Ldn/CNEL, dB Leq dB2 Residential 65 45 - Transient Lodging 65 45 - Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 45 - Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls - - 35 Churches, Meeting Halls 65 - 45 Office Buildings - - 45 Schools, Libraries, Museums - - 45 Source: City of Fresno General Plan (2014). 1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown or is not applicable, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use. 2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use. CNEL = community noise equivalent level dB = decibel(s) Ldn = day-night average noise level Leq = equivalent continuous sound level Table 5: Stationary Noise Sources Daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) Nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (Leq), dBA 50 45 Maximum Sound Level (Lmax), dBA 70 60 Source: City of Fresno General Plan (2014). 1 The Planning and Development Director, on a case-by-case basis, may designate land uses other than those shown in this table to be noise-sensitive, and may require appropriate noise mitigation measures. 2 As determined at outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown or not applicable, the noise exposure standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use. When ambient noise levels exceed or equal the levels in this table, mitigation shall only be required to limit noise to the ambient plus five dB. dB = decibel(s) dBA = A-weighted decibel(s) Ldn = day-night average noise level Leq = equivalent continuous sound level Lmax = maximum A-weighted sound level • Policy NS-1-a: Desirable and Generally Acceptable Exterior Noise Environment. Establish 65 dBA Ldn or CNEL as the standard for the desirable maximum average exterior noise levels for defined usable exterior areas of residential and noise-sensitive uses for noise, but designate 60 dBA Ldn or CNEL (measured at the property line) for noise generated by stationary sources impinging upon residential and noise-sensitive uses. Maintain 65 dBA Ldn or CNEL as the maximum average exterior noise levels for non- sensitive commercial land uses, and maintain 70 dBA Ldn or CNEL as maximum average exterior noise level for industrial land uses, both to be 81 measured at the property line of parcels where noise is generated which may impinge on neighboring properties. • Policy NS-1-c: Generally Unacceptable Exterior Noise Exposure Range. Establish the exterior noise exposure of greater than 65 dB Ldn or CNEL to be generally unacceptable for residential and other noise sensitive uses for noise generated by sources in Policy NS-1-a, and study alternative less noise- sensitive uses for these areas if otherwise appropriate. Require appropriate noise reducing mitigation measures as determined by a site-specific acoustical analysis to comply with the generally desirable or generally acceptable exterior noise level and the required 45 dB interior noise level standards set in Table 4 as conditions of permit approval. • Policy NS-1-g: Noise mitigation measures which help achieve the noise level targets of this plan include, but are not limited to, the following: o Façades with substantial weight and insulation; o Installation of sound-rated windows for primary sleeping and activity areas; o Installation of sound-rated doors for all exterior entries at primary sleeping and activity areas; o Greater building setbacks and exterior barriers; o Acoustic baffling of vents for chimneys, attic and gable ends; o Installation of mechanical ventilation systems that provide fresh air under closed window conditions. • NS-1-i Mitigation by New Development. Require an acoustical analysis where new development of industrial, commercial, or other noise generating land uses (including transportation facilities such as roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise levels that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established by Tables 4 and 5 to determine impacts, and require developers to mitigate these impacts in conformance with Tables 4 and 5 as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means. Noise mitigation measures may include: o The screening of noise sources such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment; o Providing increased setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings; o Installation of walls and landscaping that serve as noise buffers; 82 o Installation of soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows; and o Regulating operations, such as hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup. Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved by the City, provided a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along roadways when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility, with no City funding. • Policy NS-1-j: Significance Threshold. Establish, as a threshold of significance for the City’s environmental review process, that a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity by 3 dB Ldn or CNEL or more above the ambient noise limits established in this General Plan Update. Chapter 10, Article 1 (Noise Regulations), of the Fresno Municipal Code establishes excessive noise guidelines and exemptions. Section 10-109 states that construction noise is exempted from City noise regulations provided such work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday. Certain land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Examples of these land uses include residential areas, educational facilities, hospitals, childcare facilities, and senior housing. The nearest sensitive receptors include single-family residences located approximately 65 feet west of the project site across North Abby Street. The following section describes how the short-term construction and long-term operational noise impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant with mitigation. Short-Term (Construction) Noise Impacts. Project construction would result in short- term noise impacts on the nearby sensitive receptors. Maximum construction noise would be short-term, generally intermittent depending on the construction phase, and variable depending on receiver distance from the active construction zone. The duration of noise impacts generally would be from one day to several days depending on the phase of construction. The level and types of noise impacts that would occur during construction are described below. Short-term noise impacts would occur during grading and site preparation activities. Table 6 lists typical construction equipment noise levels (Lmax) recommended for noise 83 impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor, obtained from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model. Construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels currently in the project area but would no longer occur once construction of the proposed project is completed. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project. The first type involves construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site, which would incrementally increase noise levels on roads leading to the site. As shown in Table 6, there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential at a maximum level of 84 dBA Lmax with trucks passing at 50 feet. The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during grading and construction on the project site. Construction is performed in discrete steps, or phases, each with its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Table 6: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%) Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet1 Backhoes 40 80 Compactor (ground) 20 80 Compressor 40 80 Cranes 16 85 Dozers 40 85 Dump Trucks 40 84 Excavators 40 85 Flat Bed Trucks 40 84 Forklift 20 85 Front-end Loaders 40 80 Graders 40 85 Impact Pile Drivers 20 95 Jackhammers 20 85 Pick-up Truck 40 55 Pneumatic Tools 50 85 Pumps 50 77 Rock Drills 20 85 Rollers 20 85 Scrapers 40 85 Tractors 40 84 84 Table 6: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%) Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet1 Welder 40 73 Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA 2006). Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 Maximum noise levels were developed based on Spec 721.560 from the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) program to be consistent with the City of Boston’s Noise Code for the “Big Dig” project. Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level Table 6 lists maximum noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments for typical construction equipment, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Typical noise levels range up to 88 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading of the project site, tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full-power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. Construction details (e.g., construction fleet activities) are not yet known; therefore, this analysis assumes that scrapers, bulldozers, and water trucks/pickup trucks would be operating simultaneously during construction of the proposed project. As discussed above, noise levels associated with this equipment operating simultaneously would be approximately 88 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. As noted above, the nearest sensitive receptors include single-family residences located approximately 65 feet west of the project site across North Abby Street. Based on a reduction in noise of 6 dBA per doubling of distance, there would be a decrease of approximately 2 dBA from the active construction area to the nearest residence. Therefore, the closest off-site sensitive receptor may be subject to short-term construction noise reaching 86 dBA Lmax (88 dBA Lmax – 2 dBA) when construction is occurring. However, construction equipment would operate at various locations within the 8-acre project site and would only generate maximum noise levels when operations occur closest to the receptor. To ensure that the project’s potential construction-related noise impacts are less than significant, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires the project to equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards, which would reduce the potential impacts associated with construction equipment. Additionally, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires the project to designate a “disturbance coordinator” at the City who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The 85 disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler) and would determine and implement reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. These measures would ensure that the project’s potential construction-related noise impacts are mitigated to less-than-significant levels. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact associated with the generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, State, or federal standards. Long-Term (Operational) Noise Impacts. Motor vehicles with their distinctive noise characteristics are the dominant noise source in the project vicinity. The amount of noise varies according to many factors, such as volume of traffic, vehicle mix (percentage of cars and trucks), average traffic speed, and distance from the observer. Implementation of the proposed project would result in new daily trips on local roadways in the project site vicinity. A characteristic of sound is that a doubling of a noise source is required in order to result in a perceptible (3 dBA or greater) increase in the resulting noise level. As discussed below in Section XVII, Transportation, the proposed project would generate approximately 311 average daily trips. The project site is located adjacent to SR 41 and based on Figure NS-2 of the General Plan, the project site is subject to noise levels reaching 70 dB. As such, based on the project site’s existing traffic noise levels and proximity to SR 41, the additional 311 average daily trips are not expected to result in a doubling of traffic volumes along any roadway segment in the project vicinity and would not result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels at receptors in the project vicinity. In addition, with implementation of the proposed project, there would be an increase in activity at the project site. The project site itself is located in a primarily developed area surrounded primarily by other commercial uses. Noise from the proposed project would be similar to existing conditions and would generally include noise from vehicles, air conditioner units, and other similar equipment. It is not expected that the proposed project would result in a perceptible increase in noise to surrounding land uses. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would substantially increase noise levels over existing conditions. Operation of the proposed project would result in similar noise levels as existing conditions and, therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would substantially increase noise levels over existing conditions, and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible motion. Groundborne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors. Vibration energy propagates from a source, through intervening soil and rock 86 layers, to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by the occupants as the motion of building surfaces, rattling of items on shelves or hanging on walls, or as a low-frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibrating walls, floors, and ceilings radiating sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less. This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings. Typical sources of groundborne vibration are construction activities (e.g., pavement breaking and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), and occasional traffic on rough roads. In general, groundborne vibration from standard construction practices is only a potential issue when within 25 feet of sensitive uses. Groundborne vibration levels from construction activities very rarely reach levels that can damage structures; however, these levels are perceptible near the active construction site. With the exception of old buildings built prior to the 1950s or buildings of historic significance, potential structural damage from heavy construction activities rarely occurs. When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic (even heavy trucks) is rarely perceptible. The streets surrounding the project area are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant groundborne vibration. In addition, the rubber tires and suspension systems of buses and other on-road vehicles make it unusual for on-road vehicles to cause groundborne noise or vibration problems. It is, therefore, assumed that no such vehicular vibration impacts would occur and, therefore, no vibration impact analysis of on-road vehicles is necessary. Therefore, once constructed, the proposed project would not contain uses that would generate groundborne vibration. This impact would be less than significant. Construction Vibration. Construction of the proposed project could result in the generation of groundborne vibration. The project’s construction vibration impact analysis evaluates the level of human annoyance using vibration levels in VdB and assesses the potential for building damages using vibration levels in peak particle velocity (PPV) (in/sec) because vibration levels calculated in root-mean-square (RMS) are best for characterizing human response to building vibration, while vibration level in PPV is best used to characterize potential for damage. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidelines indicate that a vibration level up to 102 VdB (an equivalent to 0.5 in/sec in PPV) is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For a non-engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec in PPV). Table 7 shows the PPV and VdB values at 25 feet from a construction vibration source. As shown in Table 7, bulldozers and other heavy-tracked construction equipment (except for pile drivers and vibratory rollers) generate approximately 87 VdB of groundborne vibration when measured at 25 feet, based on the Transit Noise and 87 Vibration Impact Assessment. At this level, groundborne vibration would result in potential annoyance to residents and workers but would not cause any damage to the buildings. Table 7: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment Reference PPV/LV at 25 feet PPV (in/sec) LV (VdB)1 Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104 Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0.170 93 Vibratory Roller 0.210 94 Hoe Ram 0.089 87 Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson Drilling 0.089 87 Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small Bulldozer 0.003 58 Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA 2018). Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec. µin/sec = micro-inches per second FTA = Federal Transit Administration in/sec = inches per second LV = velocity in decibels PPV = peak particle velocity RMS = root-mean-square VdB = vibration velocity decibels Construction vibration, similar to vibration from other sources, would not have any significant effects on outdoor activities (e.g., those outside of residences and commercial/office buildings in the project vicinity). Outdoor site preparation for the proposed project is expected to include the use of bulldozers and loaded trucks. The greatest levels of vibration are anticipated to occur during the site preparation phase. All other phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project boundary) because vibration impacts occur normally within the buildings. The formula for vibration transmission is provided below. LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 ft) – 30 Log (D/25) PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 As shown in Table 7, for typical construction activity, the equipment with the highest vibration generation potential is the large bulldozer, which would generate 87 VdB at 25 feet. The closest buildings to the project site includes commercial buildings located 60 feet north of the project site boundary and 60 feet south of the project site boundary. At 60 feet, these buildings would experience vibration levels of up to 76 VdB (0.024 PPV [in/sec]), which would not exceed the FTA threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec PPV) for non-engineered timber and masonry building damage when bulldozers and loaded 88 trucks operate at or near the project construction boundary. Although construction vibration levels at surrounding uses would have the potential to result in annoyance, these vibration levels would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed and impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. c) 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? The nearest airports include the Sierra Sky Airport, located approximately 4.8 miles west of the project site, the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, located approximately 6 miles southeast of the project site, and the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, located approximately 7.9 miles southwest of the project site. In addition, the nearest medical center helipads include the Saint Agnes Medical Center, located 1.22 miles southeast of the project site. Although the project is located within two miles of a hospital heliport, heliport operations are not expected to expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. The project site is not located within 2 miles of any local airports. The project is located in the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan within the boundaries of Fresno Yosemite International Airport, Zone 7 PAZ. Within Zone 7 PAZ, there is generally no concern with regard to any object up to 100 feet AGL unless it is located on high ground or it is a solitary object (e.g., an antenna) more than 35 feet AGL.25 The proposed project is located in a generally flat area, and would include a retail facility with a maximum height of 42 feet. Additionally, the proposed facility is located adjacent to existing commercial facilities of similar dimensions and would not be a solitary object. In addition, although aircraft- related noise is occasionally audible on the project site, the site does not lie within the 55 dBA CNEL noise contours of any of these airports or helipads. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels due to the proximity of a public airport. This impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure NOI-1: The project contractor shall implement the following measures during construction of the project: • Construction of the masonry wall on the western property line shall be constructed during the first phase of the construction project. • Equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. 25 Fresno Council of Governments, 2018. Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. December. 89 • Place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the active project site. • Locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest possible distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the active project site during all construction activities. • Ensure that all general construction-related activities are restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday. • Designate a “disturbance coordinator” at the City who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler) and would determine and implement reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. 90 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X DISCUSSION a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project would include the construction of a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure. The proposed project would not result in direct population growth as the use proposed is not residential and would not contribute to permanent residency on site. Once operational, the proposed project would employ 85 people. The 2022 Regional Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) prepared by the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) determined that a jurisdiction is considered housing rich if the employment-to-household ratio is less than 1.10 jobs for every household and job rich if the ratio is above 1.30 jobs for every household.26 The City of Fresno had an employment-to-household ratio of 1.25 in 2020, which indicates that while the City is not considered “job poor”, employment opportunities within the City’s jurisdiction are likely to be occupied by residents of the City.27 Further, the site is designated Commercial - Regional by the Fresno General 26 Fresno Council of Governments, 2022. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2022 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. Pg. 3-403. April 15. 27 Fresno Council of Governments, 2020. Fresno County 2019-2050 Growth Projections. Website: https://agendas.fresnocog.org/itemAttachments/604/Fresno_COG_2019_2050_Projections_Draft_Report_10 1920.pdf (accessed April 2023) 91 Plan and as such, development of the project would not generate growth beyond that anticipated in the Fresno General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly, and this impact would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No housing is currently present on the project site, and therefore, there are no people living on the project site that would be displaced by the proposed project. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to population and housing, and no mitigation is required. 92 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XV. PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? X Police protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other public facilities? X DISCUSSION a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the 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? The City of Fresno Fire Department (FFD) would provide fire protection services to the proposed project. There are 23 FFD fire stations in Fresno, with the closest fire station, Fire Station 13, located 1.08 miles northeast from the project site. Planned growth under the Fresno General Plan would increase calls for fire protection service in the City. The proposed project is consistent 93 with the land use designation identified in the Fresno General Plan, and does not represent unplanned growth given that the project site would be developed consistent with its land use and zoning designations. The project could result in an incremental increase in the demand for fire protection services as a result of additional employees to the project site. However, the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable codes for fire safety and emergency access. Design of project access, internal circulation system, fire lanes and fire suppression features would be developed to City of Fresno standards and conditions of approval. In addition, the Project Applicant would be required to submit plans to the FFD for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits to ensure the project would conform to applicable building codes and that adequate emergency access and on-site circulation are provided. The FFD would continue providing services to the project site and would not require additional firefighters to serve the proposed project. The construction of a new or expanded fire station would not be required.28 The proposed project would not result in a significant impact on the physical environment due to the incremental increase in demand for fire protection and life safety services. The incremental increase in demand for services is not expected to adversely affect existing responses times to the site or within the City. Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on fire protection. No mitigation is required. ii. Police protection? The City of Fresno Police Department (FPD) provides police protection to the project site. The FPD headquarters are located at 2323 Mariposa Street, approximately 7.16 miles south of the project site. The project site is located within the Northeast Police District of the FPD, and the closest police station to the site is located at 1450 East Teague Avenue, approximately 1.9 miles northeast of the project site. Planned growth under the Fresno General Plan would increase calls for police protection service in the City. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation identified in the Fresno General Plan, and does not represent unplanned growth. The project could result in an incremental increase in the demand for police protection services. The FPD would continue to provide services to the project site and would not require additional officers to serve the project site. The construction of new or expanded police facilities would not be required.29 Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse impact associated with the provision of additional police facilities or services, and impacts to police protection would represent a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation is 28 City of Fresno. Holt, Robert. Supervising Planner. April 11, 2023. Personal communication. 29 City of Fresno. Holt, Robert. Supervising Planner. April 11, 2023. Personal communication. 94 required. iii. Schools? The project is located within the jurisdiction of the Clovis Unified School District (CUSD). The proposed project would not generate student demand or otherwise impact school services given that it does not include housing or a residential component. Additionally, the Project Applicant would be required to pay applicable school impact fees per Government Code Section 65995 et seq. to fund the development of additional school facilities and expansion of school services needed in the City. Through payment of applicable school impact fees, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to CUSD. As such, there would be a less than significant impact related to schools. iv. Parks? Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the use of parks within the vicinity of the project site because the proposed project does not include a residential component. The proposed project is not expected to adversely affect the physical conditions of local and regional open space areas or recreational facilities, nor require the provisions of new parks or facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact on the demand of parks in the area. v. Other public facilities? The proposed project would not increase population beyond what is planned in the Fresno General Plan; therefore, development of the proposed project would not increase demand for other public services, including libraries, community centers, and public health care facilities in a way that would require construction of additional facilities beyond what is planned to accommodate planned population growth in the Fresno General Plan. Therefore, impacts to other public facilities would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to public services, and no mitigation is required. 95 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVI. RECREATION - Would the project: a) 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? X 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? X DISCUSSION a) 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? The proposed project would include the construction of a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping and infrastructure, and would not include a residential component. As such, the proposed project is not expected to generate population growth that would result in an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. Therefore, there would be a less-than-significant impact related to the increase in 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. No mitigation is required. b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project would not include or require the construction or expansion of existing public recreational facilities; therefore, development of the proposed project and associated recreational opportunities for use by users of the project site would not result in additional environmental effects beyond those described in this document. As a result, no impact would occur to recreational facilities and the proposed project would 96 not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to recreational facilities, and no mitigation is required. 97 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? X b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X DISCUSSION a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The proposed project is located within Traffic Impact Zone (TIZ) III according to the Mobility and Transportation Element of the Fresno General Plan. According to the Mobility and Transportation Element, projects in TIZ III that generate more than 100 peak hour trips would require a detailed traffic analysis. Additionally, according to the City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines, dated February 2009, a detailed LOS based Traffic Impact Study (TIS) shall not be required for a project if it generates less than 100 peak hour trips. A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis,30 included as Appendix E, for the project was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) for Land Use 890 – “Furniture Store” The proposed project is anticipated to generate 27 trips in the a.m. peak hour, 54 trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 661 gross daily trips. 30 LSA, 2023. Fresno Living Spaces Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum. March 3. 98 Retail projects typically draw significant amount trips from the traffic passing the site on an adjacent street. These trips are not “new” trips made for the sole purpose of visiting the site, but are trips made as an intermediate stop enroute to a final destination. Trips from traffic passing the site on an adjacent street are referred to as “pass‐by” trips. Pass‐by trip percentage for the project land use was obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). The pass‐by trips were subtracted from the gross trip generation trips to obtain the net primary trips for the project. The project is anticipated to generate 27 net trips in the a.m. peak hour, 25 net trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 311 net daily trips, which falls below the City’s 100 peak hour trip threshold. As such, the proposed project falls below the existing threshold for TIZ III as determined in the Fresno General Plan31 and the 100‐trip threshold established by the City’s Guidelines. Bus stop facilities for the 32 and 34 FAX bus lines run along East Alluvial Avenue, located approximately 85 and 175 feet north of the project site respectively. The proposed project would not involve the alteration of any existing transit and pedestrian facility or infrastructure in the surrounding area. Furthermore, because the traffic generated by the proposed project is below the threshold of significance identified in the Fresno General Plan and TIS Guidelines, the proposed project would not interfere with the operation of any transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities on the area. The proposed project is located in a Commercial - Regional (CR) zone, and the operations of the proposed project would be consistent with the permitted uses of the area. The proposed project would not conflict with applicable existing transportation programs and policies. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much actual auto travel (additional miles driven) a proposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact. The State CEQA Guidelines were amended to implement SB 743, by adding Section 15064.3. Among its provisions, Section 15064.3 confirms that, except with respect to transportation projects, a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities is no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(4) states that “[a] lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in 31 City of Fresno, 2014. Fresno General Plan-Mobility and Transportation Element. Available online at: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/General-Plan-4-Mobility-and- Transportation-7-19.pdf (accessed December 2022). 99 absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.” On June 25, 2020, the City of Fresno adopted CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds, pursuant to Senate Bill 743 to be effective of July 1, 2020. The thresholds described therein are referred to herein as the City of Fresno VMT Thresholds. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds document was prepared and adopted consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7. The December 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), was utilized as a reference and guidance document in the preparation of the Fresno VMT Thresholds. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds adopted a screening standard and criteria that can be used to screen out qualified projects that meet the adopted criteria from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.32 The City’s guidelines include multiple screening criteria for land use projects. Also, an excel based VMT calculator tool is available from Fresno COG that can be used to conduct VMT analysis for small land use projects that are consistent with the Fresno General Plan. However, given the proposed retail land use of the project and the size of the proposed project size, the project would not meet screening criteria identified in the guidelines and the excel based VMT calculator tool would not be applicable for evaluation of retail projects. Therefore, a detailed VMT analysis was prepared for the project and Fresno COG’s Activity‐Based Model (ABM) was used to evaluate the project VMT impact. For projects that are not screened out, a quantitative analysis of VMT impacts must be prepared and compared against the adopted VMT thresholds of significance. The Fresno VMT Thresholds document includes thresholds of significance for development projects, transportation projects, and land use plans. These thresholds of significance were developed using the County of Fresno as the applicable region, and the required reduction of VMT (as adopted in the Fresno VMT Thresholds) corresponds to Fresno County’s contribution to the statewide GHG emission reduction target. In order to reach the statewide GHG reduction target of 15%, Fresno County must reduce its GHG emissions by 13%. The method of reducing GHG by 13% is to reduce VMT by 13% as well. 32 City of Fresno, 2020. CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds for the City of Fresno. Available online at: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2020/06/CEQA-Guidelines-for-Vehicle- Miles-Traveled-Thresholds-June-2020-DRAFT.pdf (accessed January 21, 2022) 100 The City’s adopted thresholds for development projects correspond to the regional thresholds set by the Fresno COG. For residential and non-residential (except retail) development projects, the adopted threshold of significance is a 13% reduction, which means that projects that generate VMT in excess of a 13% reduction from the existing regional VMT per capita or per employee would have a significant environmental impact. Projects that reduce VMT by more than 13% are less than significant. For retail projects, the adopted threshold is any net increase in VMT per employee compared to existing VMT per employee. Quantitative assessments of the VMT generated by a development project are determined using the Fresno COG Activity Based Model (ABM), which is a tour-based model. Methodology. The VMT Guidelines suggest use of total VMT as the metric to evaluate retail land uses. The project consists of only retail land use and hence total VMT was used as the VMT metric. Therefore, if there is a net increase in total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario compared to the “no project” scenario, the project would result in a significant VMT impact. Total VMT for the “no project” scenario was obtained using a separate no project model run. The first step in the preparation of this analysis was to update the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) in the model that includes the project area. Fresno COG ABM includes ability to add or split zones. In order to isolate the project VMT, a new zone was created in the model. The project description included the projected number of employees for the proposed project (85 employees) which was included in the newly created zone for modeling purposes. No project specific network modifications were required for the model run. A model run was conducted for the existing/base scenario with updated model inputs. The outputs from this updated model run were used to calculate the total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario. Project Impact Determination. Based on the City’s VMT Guidelines, the project will have a significant VMT impact if there is a net increase in total regional VMT for the “with project” compared to the “no project” scenario. As shown in Table 8 the total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario is less than the total regional VMT for the “no project” scenario. Therefore, as per the City’s VMT Guidelines, the project would not have a significant VMT impact. As such, the proposed project would result in a less- than-significant VMT impact and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Table 8: Fresno County VMT for the No Project and With Project Scenario With Project No Project Difference Total Roadway VMT 23,240,962 23,241,062 (100) Source: LSA (March 3, 2023). Fresno Living Spaces Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum 101 c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Vehicle access to the project site would be provided through one ingress and egress driveway along North Abby Street and one ingress and egress driveway located along the northwest boundary of the site; this driveway would connect to the adjacent commercial development north of the site and provide access for vehicles entering through, or exiting towards, two proposed driveways along East Alluvial Avenue. The proposed driveway along North Abby Street and the two driveways along East Alluvial Avenue are stop controlled. Therefore, vehicles exiting the project site from the project driveway must stop before they continue to merge on the neighboring circulation network. Pedestrian circulation for the proposed project would occur through an existing pedestrian sidewalk along the project’s frontage with North Abby Street and through internal pedestrian sidewalks and walkways in the project site. The proposed project would not include any sharp curves or other roadway design elements that would create dangerous conditions. In addition, the project design features would be required to comply with standards set by the Fresno General Plan and City Engineer. In addition, the proposed project would also be required to submit plans to the FFD for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits to ensure there are no substantial hazards associated with the project design. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment), and no mitigation is required. d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Emergency vehicles would have access to the project site via three proposed ingress and egress driveways, one along North Abby Street, one along the northwest boundary of the site, and one along East Alluvial Avenue. The FFD’s Fire Prevention Manual33 includes FFD access requirements for properties within the City of Fresno. The project would comply with applicable access requirements, including provision of a minimum of two ingress and egress access points (for buildings over 650 feet in depth or width), provision of fire lane markings for emergency vehicle access (markings placed at 50 foot intervals), provision of a minimum clear drive width of 20 feet within the parking areas in the project site, and provision of appropriate turnarounds (minimum 44-foot centerline turning radius with a minimum of 20 feet clear drive width), among other requirements. Furthermore, the proposed project’s site plan would be subject to review and approval by the FFD to ensure the project includes adequate emergency access. In 33 Fresno Fire Department, 2008. Fire Prevention Manual. Development Requirements - 403.002 Fire Department Access. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/fire/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/09/403.002.pdf (accessed April 2023). 102 addition, as discussed in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, project implementation would not physically interfere with emergency evacuation or the FFD access to and from the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less- than-significant impacts related to inadequate emergency access, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to transportation, and no mitigation is required. 103 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: X i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC section 5020.1(k), or, X ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. X DISCUSSION a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: 104 i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Tribal Cultural Resources are those resources with inherent tribal values that are difficult to identify through the same means as archaeological resources. These resources can be identified and understood through direct consultation with the tribes who attach tribal value to the resource. Tribal cultural resources may include Native American archaeological sites, but they may also include other types of resources such as cultural landscapes or sacred places. The appropriate treatment of tribal cultural resources is determined through consultation with tribes. The State requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources through the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)). Additional information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. Assembly Bill (AB) 52, which became law January 1, 2015, requires that, as part of the CEQA review process, public agencies provide early notice of a project to California Native American Tribes to allow for consultation between the tribe and the public agency. The purpose of AB 52 is to provide the opportunity for public agencies and tribes to consult and consider potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCR’s), as defined by the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 2107(a). Under AB 52, public agencies shall reach out to California Native American Tribes who have requested to be notified of projects in areas within or which may have been affiliated with their tribal 105 geographic range. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Table Mountain Rancheria and Dumna Wo Wah Tribes were invited to consult. A certified letter was mailed to the above-mentioned tribes on March 14, 2023. The 30-day comment period ended on April 13, 2023. The contracted Tribes did not provide a response to invitations to consult. No tribal cultural resources or historical resources listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k) were identified on the project site through the record search process, field survey process or review of the Sacred Lands File through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).34 If any artifacts are inadvertently discovered during ground-disturbing activities, existing federal, State, and local laws and regulations would require construction activities to cease until such artifacts are properly examined and determined not to be of significance by a qualified cultural resources professional. In addition, Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2 and CUL-3 included above in Section V, Cultural Resources, would apply to the project and would reduce potential impacts to unknown historical resources to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the nature and significance of the find and determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified 34 LSA, 2023. Cultural Resources Survey Study for the Living Spaces Project in Fresno, Fresno County, California (LSA Project No. LSP2201). March 7. 106 archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources pursuant to California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(f))., including but not limited to collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. If determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist, archaeological monitoring shall commence and continue until grading and excavation are complete or until the monitoring archaeologist determines, based on field observations and in consultation with the qualified archaeologist, that there is little likelihood of encountering additional archaeological cultural resources. Archaeological monitoring may be reduced from full-time to part-time or spot-checking if determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist based on monitoring results. Upon completion of any monitoring activities, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of monitoring activities. The final version of this report shall be submitted to the SSJVIC. If the found resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long- term preservation to allow future scientific study. Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple 107 human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. 108 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effect? X b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? X c) Result in a determination by the waste water 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? X d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? X e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X 109 DISCUSSION a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? As identified in the Project Description, utilities required to serve the proposed project would include water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure. Water. The proposed project would preserve existing on-site connections to the existing water main in North Abby Street and would install additional 2-inch water lines on-site to improve water distribution and circulation in the project site. Short-term demand for water may occur during excavation, grading, and construction activities on site. Construction activities would require water primarily for dust mitigation purposes. Water from the existing potable water lines in the vicinity of the project site would be used. Overall, short-term construction activities would require minimal water and are not expected to have any adverse impacts on the existing water system or available water supplies. The proposed project would not require the construction of new or expanded water conveyance, treatment, or collection facilities with respect to construction activities. According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City’s water system consists of about 1,860 miles of distribution and transmission mains, 202 active municipal groundwater wells, three surface water treatment facilities (SWTFs) with current rated capacities ranging from 4 to 54 million gallons per day (mgd), five water storage facilities with pump stations, including one at each of the SWTFs plus two in the distribution system, and three booster pump facilities. The City’s UWMP identified that the City’s 2020 daily per capita water use target was 247 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). The project would include 85 employees during daily operations, which would require approximately 20,995 gallons per day. Based on the nature of the proposed project, the project-generated increase in water demand would be minimal and would fall within the City’s existing capacity and available supply. Additionally, as described in the discussion for b) below, the City would have sufficient water supplies during normal, single-year dry and multiple-year dry scenarios through 2045, and given that the project would comply with would introduce uses compatible with the zoning and land use designation of the project site, the proposed project would be consistent with growth under the Fresno General Plan and would be accounted for in the City’s UWMP projections. As such, the proposed project would not necessitate new or expanded water entitlements, and the City would be able to accommodate the increased demand for potable water. As such, the proposed project would not necessitate new or expanded 110 water entitlements, and the City would be able to accommodate the increased demand for potable water. Wastewater. Wastewater services would also be provided by the City. The proposed project would remove existing wastewater connections in the project site, with exception of a direct connection line with the wastewater main on North Abby Street. The proposed project would construct additional new 6-inch internal wastewater connections to increase connectivity of wastewater flow in the project site. No significant increase in wastewater flows is anticipated as a result of construction activities on the project site. Sanitary services during construction would be provided by portable toilet facilities, which transport waste off site for treatment and disposal. In addition, wastewater generation associated with the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed wastewater treatment requirements or exceed the available capacity to accommodate the increased wastewater flows from the proposed project. The project would be adequately served by the capacity and the existing wastewater conveyance system. As such, the proposed project would not necessitate new or expanded water entitlements, and the City would be able to accommodate the increased demand for potable water. Stormwater and Drainage Facilities. Impacts to storm drainage facilities have been previously discussed in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project would result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. Specifically, the proposed project would include construction of new surface and subsurface drainage infrastructure, including bioretention areas to encourage stormwater infiltration and manholes, drainage basins, and drainage lines to direct stormwater towards the City’s existing stormwater system along the site’s southern boundary and west of the site in North Abby Street. However, the construction of such minor facilities would be constructed in conformance with City standards; therefore, its construction would not cause significant environmental effects. Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunication Facilities. The project site currently contains a PG&E easement and a PG&E concrete utility structure in the central portion of the site that would be removed. Electric power, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities would require connections to the project site. However, because the project site is located within an urbanized area with existing facilities in close proximity, connection to these facilities would not cause significant environmental effects. As a result, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the relocation or construction or new or expanded utilities. Summary. The proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities for water, wastewater treatment, storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications which could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 111 b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Refer to discussion b) of Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality. The City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities would supply water to the project site. Based on the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the water supplies under normal conditions for the City from 2025 (329,030 Acre Feet (AF)/year) to 2045 (357,330 AF)/year) would be sufficient to cover the potable water demand (i.e., 136,504 AF by 2025 and 167,947 AF by 2045) for each normal year through 2045.35 Additionally, water supplies for the city during single dry year and five dry year periods are predicted to be sufficient to accommodate potable water demand in the City through 2045. The proposed project would introduce a furniture retail store and associated parking, landscaping, and infrastructure into the project site. The project site is designated Commercial – Regional in the Fresno General Plan and zoned within the City’s Commercial – Regional (CR) district, which is intended to meet local and regional retail demand, such as large-scale retail, office, civic and entertainment uses, shopping malls with large-format or “big-box” retail and supporting uses such as gas stations and hotels. The proposed project would introduce uses compatible with the zoning and land use designation of the project site. As such, the proposed project would be consistent with growth under the Fresno General Plan and would be accounted for in the City’s UWMP projections. Therefore, the proposed project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Refer to discussion a) above. Wastewater generation associated with the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed wastewater treatment requirements or exceed the available capacity to accommodate the increased wastewater flows from the proposed project. The project would be adequately served by the capacity and the existing wastewater conveyance system. In addition, the proposed project is not expected to exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. As such, the proposed project would 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 and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is 35 City of Fresno. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/ wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2021/07/Fresno-2020-UWMP_Final_2021-07-21.pdf (accessed December 2022). 112 required. In addition, the proposed project would be subject to the payment of any applicable connection charges and/or fees and extension of services in a manner that is compliant with the Department of Public Utilities standards, specifications, and policies. As such, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Garbage disposed of in the City of Fresno is taken to Cedar Avenue Recycling and Transfer Station. Once trash has been off‐loaded at the transfer station, it is sorted, and non‐recyclable solid waste is loaded onto large trucks and taken to the American Avenue Landfill located approximately 6 miles southwest of Kerman. The American Avenue Landfill (i.e., American Avenue Disposal Site 10‐AA‐0009) has a maximum permitted capacity of 32,700,000 cubic yards and a remaining capacity of 29,358,535 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date of August 31, 2031. The maximum permitted throughput is 2,200 tons per day. Other landfills within the County of Fresno include the Clovis Landfill (City of Clovis Landfill 10-AA-0004) with a remaining capacity of 7,740,000 cubic yards, a maximum permitted throughput of 2,000 tons per day, and an estimated closure date of April 30, 2047.36 37 Based on CalEEMod, operation of the proposed project would generate approximately 1,153 tons of solid waste per year, which is approximately 3.2 tons per day. Given the available capacity at the landfills, the additional solid waste generated by the proposed project is not anticipated to cause the facility to exceed its daily permitted capacity. Additionally, the project would include a vertical cardboard baler and an Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) foam melting machine on-site to compact waste EPS foam and cardboard for recycling. The recycled material would then be transported to the Project Applicant’s distribution center to be sold as raw material for the fabrication of recycled goods. In this way, the proposed project would reduce waste generated on-site that would be sent to landfills. Therefore, the proposed project would be served by a landfill with sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project’s waste disposal needs, and impacts associated with the disposition of solid waste would be less than significant. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 36 CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. American Avenue Disposal Site (10-AA-0009). Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/352 (accessed December 13, 2022). 37 CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. City Of Clovis Landfill (10-AA-0004). Website: https://www2. calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4529?siteID=347 (accessed December 13, 2022). 113 The proposed project would comply with CALGreen, the City’s Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management Guide, and with waste management policies and recommendations from the Fresno General Plan and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Update.38 The proposed project would dispose of waste in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local recycling, reduction, and waste requirements and policies. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to utilities and service systems, and no mitigation is required. 38 City of Fresno. 2021. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Update. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2021/03/Link4AppendixGGHGRPUpdate.pdf (accessed November 2022). 114 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XX. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? X c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? X d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? X DISCUSSION a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The California Emergency Services Act requires cities to prepare and maintain an Emergency Plan for natural, manmade, or war-caused emergencies that result in 115 conditions of disaster or in extreme peril to life. The City's full‐time Emergency Preparedness Officer (EPO) is responsible for ensuring that Fresno's emergency response plans are up‐to‐date and implemented properly. The EPO also facilitates cooperation between City departments and other local, State and federal agencies that would be involved in emergency response operations. The City of Fresno Emergency Operations Center (EOC) serves as the coordination and communication between the City of Fresno and Fresno County Operational Area EOC. The proposed project would not result in any alterations of existing roadways that would block the circulation of emergency response services or introduce elements that would conflict with the operations of the EOC. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with emergency evacuation plans in the City, and this impact would be less than significant. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Wildland fires occur in geographic areas that contain the types and conditions of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure density susceptible to risks associated with uncontrolled fires that can be started by lightning, improperly managed campfires, cigarettes, sparks from automobiles, and other ignition sources. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, the project site is not located within a Very or High Fire Hazard Severity Zone in either a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) or a State Responsibility Area (SRA).39 Sparse vegetation does exist between the project site’s eastern boundary and SR 41, which represents limited ignition sources in the project vicinity. Design of project access, internal circulation system, fire lanes and fire suppression features would be developed to City of Fresno standards and conditions of approval requirements. Additionally, the Fresno Fire Department (FFD) would also review the proposed development plans prior to project approval to ensure that adequate emergency access and on-site circulation are provided. Therefore, with implementation of the City’s design requirements and FFD review of project plans, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant loss, injury or death involving wildland fires and there would be a no impact. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Utility and infrastructure improvements included as part of the project are described in Section XIX, Utilities and in the Project Description. The project site is not located in or near a very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). Utility installations would not exacerbate fire risk due to the location of the project site in an urban area outside of a 39 Cal Fire. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available online at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ (accessed December 2022). 116 designated fire hazard zone. Therefore, the proposed project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that would exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. There would be no impact and no mitigation would be required. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Landslides and other forms of mass wasting, including mud flows, debris flows, and soil slips, occur as soil moves downslope under the influence of gravity. Landslides are frequently triggered by intense rainfall or seismic shaking but can also occur as a result of erosion and downslope runoff caused by rain following a fire. As previously discussed in Section VII, Geology and Soils, the City of Fresno Planning Area is located within an area that consists of mostly flat topography within the Central Valley. Accordingly, there is no risk of large landslides in the majority of the Planning Area. In addition, the project site is generally level and would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects associated with landslides. Further, as stated previously, the project site is not located in or near a VHFHSZ in LRA or SRA. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. There would be no impact and no mitigation would be required. Mitigation Measures The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to wildfire, and no mitigation is required. 117 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 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? X 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)? X c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X DISCUSSION a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the 118 number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The project site does not provide suitable habitat for special-status animal species. Common wildlife species that are adapted to urban environments are expected to continue to use the project site and vicinity. The project site is not occupied by, or suited for, any special-status species. As a result, the proposed project would not have direct or indirect adverse effects on special-status plants or wildlife. The project site is not in an area where there are important examples of California history or prehistory. As a result, a less-than-significant impact would occur. 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.) The proposed project’s impacts would be individually limited and not cumulatively considerable due to the site-specific nature of the potential impacts. The potentially significant impacts that can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of recommended mitigation measures include the topics of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise and Tribal Cultural Resources. These impacts would primarily be related to construction-period activities, would be temporary in nature, and would not substantially contribute to any potential cumulative impacts associated with these topics. For the topics of Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildlife, the proposed project would have no impacts or less-than-significant impacts, and therefore, the proposed project would not substantially contribute to any potential cumulative impacts for these topics. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The proposed project’s potential to result in environmental effects that could directly or indirectly impacts human beings has been evaluated in this Initial Study. The proposed project would not result in environmental effects that would directly or indirectly adversely impact human beings and the environment. 1 Mitigation Measure Monitoring Program for Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was formulated based upon the findings of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared for the proposed Living Spaces Fresno Project (project). The MMRP, which is found in Table A of this section, lists mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for the proposed project and identifies mitigation monitoring requirements. This MMRP has been prepared to comply with the requirements of State law (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). State law requires the adoption of an MMRP when mitigation measures are required to avoid significant impacts. This requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. The MMRP is intended to ensure compliance during implementation of the project. The MMRP is organized in a matrix format. The first column identifies the mitigation measure. The second column, entitled “Timing for Mitigation Measure,” refers to the implementation and schedule of mitigation measures. The third column, entitled “Mitigation Responsibility,” refers to the party responsible for implementing the mitigation measure. The fourth column, entitled “Monitoring/Reporting Agency,” refers to the agency responsible for oversight or ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. The fifth column, entitled “Verification,” will be initialed and dated by the individual designated to verify adherence to the project specific mitigation, when the mitigation measure is completed. 2 This page left intentionally blank. 3 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) I. AESTHETICS Mitigation Measure AES-1: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. Prior to issuance of building permits Project Applicant Public Works Department (PW) and Planning and Development Mitigation Measure AES-2: Lighting systems for non-residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. Prior to issuance of building permits Project Applicant Planning and Development Mitigation Measure AES-3: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. Prior to issuance of building permits Project Applicant Planning and Development Mitigation Measure AES-4: Materials used on building facades shall be non-reflective. Prior to issuance of building permits Project Applicant Planning and Development II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 4 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) There are no significant impacts to Agriculture and Forestry Resources. III. AIR QUALITY Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), the following controls are required to be included as specifications for the proposed project and implemented at the construction site: • All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. • All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. • When materials are transported off site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the Prior to issuance of grading permits, during project construction Construction Contractor Planning and Development 5 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) top of the container shall be maintained. • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden). • Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of out- door storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure BIO-1: A preconstruction clearance survey shall be required for burrowing owl no more than 30 calendar days prior to initiation of project activities. All survey results shall be delivered to the City of Fresno. If an active burrowing owl burrow is found within the project site, the Project Applicant must coordinate with CDFW to obtain applicable agency approval/direction prior to any ground disturbance activities on the site. Specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW. If no active Prior to issuance of grading permits Construction contractor, qualified biologist Planning and Development 6 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) burrowing owl burrows are identified, project activities may proceed as planned following the preconstruction survey. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: If vegetation removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to occur within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than 5 days prior to the start of such activities. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by project- related activities such as noise, vibration, increased human activity, and dust, etc. For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active by the qualified biologist. Documentation of all survey results shall be provided to the City. Prior to issuance of grading permits Construction contractor, qualified biologist Planning and Development V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Mitigation Measure CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop Prior to and during construction Construction contractor, qualified Planning and Development 7 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-germ preservation to allow future scientific study. activities historical resources specialist 8 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) Mitigation Measure CUL-2: In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the nature and significance of the find and determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources pursuant to California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(f))., including but not limited to collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. If determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist, archaeological monitoring shall commence and continue until grading and excavation are complete or until the monitoring archaeologist determines, based on field observations and in consultation with the qualified archaeologist, that there is little likelihood of encountering additional archaeological cultural resources. During construction activities Construction contractor, qualified archaeologist Planning and Development 9 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) Archaeological monitoring may be reduced from full-time to part-time or spot-checking if determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist based on monitoring results. Upon completion of any monitoring activities, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of monitoring activities. The final version of this report shall be submitted to the SSJVIC. If the found resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future During construction activities Construction contractor Planning and Development 10 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. 11 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) VI. ENERGY There are no significant impacts to Energy. VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS There are no significant impacts to Geology and Soils. VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS There are no significant impacts to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS There are no significant impacts to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY There are no significant impacts to Hydrology and Water Quality. XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING There are no significant impacts to Land Use and Planning. XII. MINERAL RESOURCES There are no significant impacts to Mineral Resources. XIII. NOISE Mitigation Measure NOI-1: The project contractor shall implement the following measures during construction of the project: • Construction of the masonry wall on the western property line shall be constructed during the first phase of the construction project. • Equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. Prior to issuance of grading permits, during project construction Construction contractor Planning and Development 12 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) • Place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the active project site. • Locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest possible distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the active project site during all construction activities. • Ensure that all general construction-related activities are restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sunday. • Designate a “disturbance coordinator” at the City who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler) and would determine and implement reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING There are no significant impacts to Population and Housing. XV. PUBLIC SERVICES There are no significant impacts to Public Services. 13 Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MEASURE Timing for Mitigation Measure Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring/ Reporting Agency Verification (Initials and Date) XVI. RECREATION There are no significant impacts to Recreation. XVII. TRANSPORTATION There are no significant impacts to Transportation. XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES There are no significant impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources. XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS There are no significant impacts to Utilities and Service Systems. XX. WILDFIRE There are no significant impacts to Wildfire. XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE There are no significant impacts related to Mandatory Findings of Significance. Source: LSA (April 2023). Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Appendix A CalEEMod Output Sheets Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 1 / 65 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report Table of Contents 1. Basic Project Information 1.1. Basic Project Information 1.2. Land Use Types 1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector 2. Emissions Summary 2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds 2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated 2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated 2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds 2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated 2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated 3. Construction Emissions Details 3.1. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated 3.2. Site Preparation (2023) - Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 2 / 65 3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated 3.4. Grading (2023) - Mitigated 3.5. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated 3.6. Building Construction (2023) - Mitigated 3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated 3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated 3.9. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated 3.10. Paving (2024) - Mitigated 3.11. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated 3.12. Architectural Coating (2024) - Mitigated 4. Operations Emissions Details 4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use 4.1.1. Unmitigated 4.1.2. Mitigated 4.2. Energy 4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated 4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 3 / 65 4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated 4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated 4.3. Area Emissions by Source 4.3.2. Unmitigated 4.3.1. Mitigated 4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use 4.4.2. Unmitigated 4.4.1. Mitigated 4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use 4.5.2. Unmitigated 4.5.1. Mitigated 4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use 4.6.1. Unmitigated 4.6.2. Mitigated 4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type 4.7.1. Unmitigated 4.7.2. Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 4 / 65 4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type 4.8.1. Unmitigated 4.8.2. Mitigated 4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type 4.9.1. Unmitigated 4.9.2. Mitigated 4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type 4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated 4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated 4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated 4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated 4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated 4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated 5. Activity Data 5.1. Construction Schedule 5.2. Off-Road Equipment 5.2.1. Unmitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 5 / 65 5.2.2. Mitigated 5.3. Construction Vehicles 5.3.1. Unmitigated 5.3.2. Mitigated 5.4. Vehicles 5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies 5.5. Architectural Coatings 5.6. Dust Mitigation 5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities 5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies 5.7. Construction Paving 5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors 5.9. Operational Mobile Sources 5.9.1. Unmitigated 5.9.2. Mitigated 5.10. Operational Area Sources 5.10.1. Hearths Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 6 / 65 5.10.1.1. Unmitigated 5.10.1.2. Mitigated 5.10.2. Architectural Coatings 5.10.3. Landscape Equipment 5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated 5.11. Operational Energy Consumption 5.11.1. Unmitigated 5.11.2. Mitigated 5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption 5.12.1. Unmitigated 5.12.2. Mitigated 5.13. Operational Waste Generation 5.13.1. Unmitigated 5.13.2. Mitigated 5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment 5.14.1. Unmitigated 5.14.2. Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 7 / 65 5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment 5.15.1. Unmitigated 5.15.2. Mitigated 5.16. Stationary Sources 5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps 5.16.2. Process Boilers 5.17. User Defined 5.18. Vegetation 5.18.1. Land Use Change 5.18.1.1. Unmitigated 5.18.1.2. Mitigated 5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type 5.18.1.1. Unmitigated 5.18.1.2. Mitigated 5.18.2. Sequestration 5.18.2.1. Unmitigated 5.18.2.2. Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 8 / 65 8. User Changes to Default Data Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 9 / 65 1. Basic Project Information 1.1. Basic Project Information Data Field Value Project Name Living Spaces Fresno Project Lead Agency — Land Use Scale Project/site Analysis Level for Defaults County Windspeed (m/s)2.70 Precipitation (days)12.2 Location 7354 N Abby St, Fresno, CA 93720, USA County Fresno City Fresno Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD Air Basin San Joaquin Valley TAZ 2429 EDFZ 5 Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric 1.2. Land Use Types Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq ft) Special Landscape Area (sq ft) Population Description Home Improvement Superstore 104 1000sqft 5.30 104,867 36,648 ——— Parking Lot 298 Space 2.70 0.00 0.00 ——— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 10 / 65 1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector #Measure Title Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads 2. Emissions Summary 2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Unmit.7.50 39.9 29.1 0.07 1.12 7.76 8.88 1.02 3.96 4.98 6,679 0.22 0.59 6,870 Mit.7.50 39.9 29.1 0.07 1.12 7.76 8.88 1.02 3.96 4.98 6,679 0.22 0.59 6,870 % Reduced —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Unmit.8.76 20.5 16.8 0.03 0.76 0.28 1.03 0.71 0.07 0.77 2,983 0.12 0.06 3,005 Mit.8.76 20.5 16.8 0.03 0.76 0.28 1.03 0.71 0.07 0.77 2,983 0.12 0.06 3,005 % Reduced —————————————— Average Daily (Max) —————————————— Unmit.1.58 9.16 7.15 0.01 0.31 0.55 0.86 0.28 0.25 0.53 1,425 0.06 0.05 1,441 Mit.1.58 9.16 7.15 0.01 0.31 0.55 0.86 0.28 0.25 0.53 1,425 0.06 0.05 1,441 % Reduced —————————————— Annual (Max) —————————————— Unmit.0.29 1.67 1.30 < 0.005 0.06 0.10 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.10 236 0.01 0.01 239 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 11 / 65 Mit.0.29 1.67 1.30 < 0.005 0.06 0.10 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.10 236 0.01 0.01 239 % Reduced —————————————— 2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily - Summer (Max) —————————————— 2023 1.16 39.9 29.1 0.07 1.12 7.76 8.88 1.02 3.96 4.98 6,679 0.22 0.59 6,870 2024 7.50 1.10 1.24 < 0.005 0.07 0.04 0.10 0.06 0.01 0.07 175 0.01 < 0.005 176 Daily - Winter (Max) —————————————— 2023 0.77 19.4 15.7 0.02 0.69 0.24 0.93 0.64 0.06 0.70 2,820 0.12 0.06 2,842 2024 8.76 20.5 16.8 0.03 0.76 0.28 1.03 0.71 0.07 0.77 2,983 0.12 0.06 3,005 Average Daily —————————————— 2023 0.34 9.16 7.15 0.01 0.31 0.55 0.86 0.28 0.25 0.53 1,425 0.06 0.05 1,441 2024 1.58 3.42 2.82 < 0.005 0.13 0.04 0.17 0.12 0.01 0.13 490 0.02 0.01 494 Annual —————————————— 2023 0.06 1.67 1.30 < 0.005 0.06 0.10 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.10 236 0.01 0.01 239 2024 0.29 0.62 0.51 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 81.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 81.8 2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 12 / 65 ——————————————Daily - Summer (Max) 2023 1.16 39.9 29.1 0.07 1.12 7.76 8.88 1.02 3.96 4.98 6,679 0.22 0.59 6,870 2024 7.50 1.10 1.24 < 0.005 0.07 0.04 0.10 0.06 0.01 0.07 175 0.01 < 0.005 176 Daily - Winter (Max) —————————————— 2023 0.77 19.4 15.7 0.02 0.69 0.24 0.93 0.64 0.06 0.70 2,820 0.12 0.06 2,842 2024 8.76 20.5 16.8 0.03 0.76 0.28 1.03 0.71 0.07 0.77 2,983 0.12 0.06 3,005 Average Daily —————————————— 2023 0.34 9.16 7.15 0.01 0.31 0.55 0.86 0.28 0.25 0.53 1,425 0.06 0.05 1,441 2024 1.58 3.42 2.82 < 0.005 0.13 0.04 0.17 0.12 0.01 0.13 490 0.02 0.01 494 Annual —————————————— 2023 0.06 1.67 1.30 < 0.005 0.06 0.10 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.10 236 0.01 0.01 239 2024 0.29 0.62 0.51 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 81.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 81.8 2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Unmit.4.44 1.29 12.9 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.55 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,385 63.9 0.14 5,030 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Unmit.3.53 1.40 7.53 0.02 0.03 0.51 0.54 0.03 0.09 0.12 3,225 63.9 0.15 4,866 Average Daily (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 13 / 65 Unmit.3.92 1.35 9.66 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.54 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,274 63.9 0.14 4,916 Annual (Max) —————————————— Unmit.0.71 0.25 1.76 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.02 0.02 542 10.6 0.02 814 2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Mobile 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Area 3.14 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 4.44 1.29 12.9 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.55 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,385 63.9 0.14 5,030 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Mobile 1.12 1.12 7.30 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,565 0.10 0.10 1,596 Area 2.40 ————————————— Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 3.53 1.40 7.53 0.02 0.03 0.51 0.54 0.03 0.09 0.12 3,225 63.9 0.15 4,866 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 14 / 65 ——————————————Average Daily Mobile 1.14 1.05 7.18 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,605 0.09 0.09 1,638 Area 2.76 0.02 2.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 9.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.28 Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 3.92 1.35 9.66 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.54 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,274 63.9 0.14 4,916 Annual —————————————— Mobile 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 Area 0.50 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 Energy < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 166 0.02 < 0.005 168 Water ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 Waste ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 Refrig.—————————————0.08 Total 0.71 0.25 1.76 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.02 0.02 542 10.6 0.02 814 2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Mobile 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Area 3.14 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 15 / 65 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 4.44 1.29 12.9 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.55 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,385 63.9 0.14 5,030 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Mobile 1.12 1.12 7.30 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,565 0.10 0.10 1,596 Area 2.40 ————————————— Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 3.53 1.40 7.53 0.02 0.03 0.51 0.54 0.03 0.09 0.12 3,225 63.9 0.15 4,866 Average Daily —————————————— Mobile 1.14 1.05 7.18 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,605 0.09 0.09 1,638 Area 2.76 0.02 2.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 9.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.28 Energy 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 1,006 0.14 0.01 1,013 Water ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Waste ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Refrig.—————————————0.50 Total 3.92 1.35 9.66 0.02 0.04 0.51 0.54 0.04 0.09 0.13 3,274 63.9 0.14 4,916 Annual —————————————— Mobile 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 Area 0.50 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 Energy < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 166 0.02 < 0.005 168 Water ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 Waste ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 Refrig.—————————————0.08 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 16 / 65 Total 0.71 0.25 1.76 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.10 0.01 0.02 0.02 542 10.6 0.02 814 3. Construction Emissions Details 3.1. Site Preparation (2023) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 1.07 39.9 28.3 0.05 1.12 —1.12 1.02 —1.02 5,295 0.21 0.04 5,314 Dust From Material Movement —————7.67 7.67 —3.94 3.94 ———— Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.04 1.64 1.16 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.04 —0.04 218 0.01 < 0.005 218 Dust From Material Movement —————0.32 0.32 —0.16 0.16 ———— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.30 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 36.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.2 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 17 / 65 ————0.030.03—0.060.06—————Dust From Material Movement Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.09 0.05 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 111 0.01 < 0.005 113 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 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.25 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 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.70 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 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 3.2. Site Preparation (2023) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 18 / 65 ——————————————Daily, Summer (Max) Off-Road Equipment 1.07 39.9 28.3 0.05 1.12 —1.12 1.02 —1.02 5,295 0.21 0.04 5,314 Dust From Material Movement —————7.67 7.67 —3.94 3.94 ———— Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.04 1.64 1.16 < 0.005 0.05 —0.05 0.04 —0.04 218 0.01 < 0.005 218 Dust From Material Movement —————0.32 0.32 —0.16 0.16 ———— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.30 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 36.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.2 Dust From Material Movement —————0.06 0.06 —0.03 0.03 ———— Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.09 0.05 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 111 0.01 < 0.005 113 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 19 / 65 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.25 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 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.70 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 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 3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.73 23.2 17.8 0.03 0.75 —0.75 0.69 —0.69 2,958 0.12 0.02 2,968 Dust From Material Movement —————2.77 2.77 —1.34 1.34 ———— Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 20 / 65 ——————————————Average Daily Off-Road Equipment 0.03 0.95 0.73 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 122 < 0.005 < 0.005 122 Dust From Material Movement —————0.11 0.11 —0.05 0.05 ———— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.17 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 20.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.2 Dust From Material Movement —————0.02 0.02 —0.01 0.01 ———— Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.08 0.04 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 94.9 0.01 < 0.005 96.6 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 Hauling 0.08 4.47 1.07 0.05 0.07 0.93 0.99 0.07 0.25 0.32 3,626 0.08 0.57 3,805 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.64 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 Hauling < 0.005 0.19 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 149 < 0.005 0.02 156 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.60 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 21 / 65 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 Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 24.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.9 3.4. Grading (2023) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.73 23.2 17.8 0.03 0.75 —0.75 0.69 —0.69 2,958 0.12 0.02 2,968 Dust From Material Movement —————2.77 2.77 —1.34 1.34 ———— Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.03 0.95 0.73 < 0.005 0.03 —0.03 0.03 —0.03 122 < 0.005 < 0.005 122 Dust From Material Movement —————0.11 0.11 —0.05 0.05 ———— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.17 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 20.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.2 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 22 / 65 ————0.010.01—0.020.02—————Dust From Material Movement Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.08 0.04 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 94.9 0.01 < 0.005 96.6 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 Hauling 0.08 4.47 1.07 0.05 0.07 0.93 0.99 0.07 0.25 0.32 3,626 0.08 0.57 3,805 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.64 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 Hauling < 0.005 0.19 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 149 < 0.005 0.02 156 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.60 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 Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 24.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.9 3.5. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 23 / 65 ——————————————Daily, Summer (Max) Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,397 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,397 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.20 6.20 4.70 0.01 0.23 —0.23 0.21 —0.21 788 0.03 0.01 791 Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.04 1.13 0.86 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 130 0.01 < 0.005 131 Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.17 0.09 1.49 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 212 0.01 0.01 216 Vendor 0.01 0.39 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 234 0.01 0.03 245 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.14 0.11 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 188 0.02 0.01 191 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 24 / 65 Vendor 0.01 0.41 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 234 0.01 0.03 245 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.05 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 64.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 65.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 76.9 < 0.005 0.01 80.4 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 Annual —————————————— Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.8 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 12.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.3 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 3.6. Building Construction (2023) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,397 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,397 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 25 / 65 Off-Road Equipment 0.20 6.20 4.70 0.01 0.23 —0.23 0.21 —0.21 788 0.03 0.01 791 Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.04 1.13 0.86 < 0.005 0.04 —0.04 0.04 —0.04 130 0.01 < 0.005 131 Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.17 0.09 1.49 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 212 0.01 0.01 216 Vendor 0.01 0.39 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 234 0.01 0.03 245 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.14 0.11 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 188 0.02 0.01 191 Vendor 0.01 0.41 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 234 0.01 0.03 245 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.05 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 64.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 65.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 76.9 < 0.005 0.01 80.4 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 Annual —————————————— Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.8 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 12.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.3 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 26 / 65 3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.09 2.77 2.10 < 0.005 0.10 —0.10 0.09 —0.09 352 0.01 < 0.005 353 Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.02 0.51 0.38 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 58.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 58.5 Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.13 0.11 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 184 0.01 0.01 187 Vendor 0.01 0.40 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 231 0.01 0.03 241 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 27 / 65 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 28.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 28.5 Vendor < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 33.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 35.3 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.72 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.85 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 3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.62 18.9 14.3 0.02 0.69 —0.69 0.64 —0.64 2,398 0.10 0.02 2,406 Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.09 2.77 2.10 < 0.005 0.10 —0.10 0.09 —0.09 352 0.01 < 0.005 353 Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 28 / 65 Off-Road Equipment 0.02 0.51 0.38 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 58.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 58.5 Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.13 0.11 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 184 0.01 0.01 187 Vendor 0.01 0.40 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 231 0.01 0.03 241 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 28.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 28.5 Vendor < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 33.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 35.3 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.72 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.85 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 3.9. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 29 / 65 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.50 13.3 10.6 0.01 0.58 —0.58 0.54 —0.54 1,512 0.06 0.01 1,517 Paving 0.71 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.36 0.29 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.01 —0.01 41.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 41.6 Paving 0.02 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 6.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.88 Paving < 0.005 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.06 0.05 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 82.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 83.7 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 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.38 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 30 / 65 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 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 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 3.10. Paving (2024) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.50 13.3 10.6 0.01 0.58 —0.58 0.54 —0.54 1,512 0.06 0.01 1,517 Paving 0.71 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.36 0.29 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.01 —0.01 41.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 41.6 Paving 0.02 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 6.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.88 Paving < 0.005 ————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 31 / 65 Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.06 0.05 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 82.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 83.7 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 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.38 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 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 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 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 3.11. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.05 1.09 0.96 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.06 —0.06 134 0.01 < 0.005 134 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 32 / 65 Architectura Coatings 7.41 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.05 1.09 0.96 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.06 —0.06 134 0.01 < 0.005 134 Architectura l Coatings 7.41 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.21 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 25.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.7 Architectura l Coatings 1.42 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 4.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.25 Architectura l Coatings 0.26 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 41.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 42.3 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 33 / 65 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 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.03 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 36.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 37.4 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 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.45 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 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.23 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 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 3.12. Architectural Coating (2024) - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Onsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.05 1.09 0.96 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.06 —0.06 134 0.01 < 0.005 134 Architectura l Coatings 7.41 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 34 / 65 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.05 1.09 0.96 < 0.005 0.07 —0.07 0.06 —0.06 134 0.01 < 0.005 134 Architectura l Coatings 7.41 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Average Daily —————————————— Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.21 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 25.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.7 Architectura l Coatings 1.42 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Annual —————————————— Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 4.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.25 Architectura l Coatings 0.26 ————————————— Onsite truck 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 Offsite —————————————— Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Worker 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 41.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 42.3 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 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 35 / 65 ——————————————Daily, Winter (Max) Worker 0.03 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 36.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 37.4 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 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 Average Daily —————————————— Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.45 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 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 Annual —————————————— Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.23 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 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 4. Operations Emissions Details 4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use 4.1.1. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Parking Lot 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 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 36 / 65 Total 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 1.12 1.12 7.30 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,565 0.10 0.10 1,596 Parking Lot 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 1.12 1.12 7.30 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,565 0.10 0.10 1,596 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 Parking Lot 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 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 4.1.2. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Parking Lot 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 1.28 0.98 8.14 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,707 0.08 0.09 1,742 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 37 / 65 1,5960.100.101,5650.100.090.010.520.510.010.027.301.121.12Home Improvement Superstore Parking Lot 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 1.12 1.12 7.30 0.02 0.01 0.51 0.52 0.01 0.09 0.10 1,565 0.10 0.10 1,596 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 Parking Lot 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 0.21 0.19 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 266 0.02 0.02 271 4.2. Energy 4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————619 0.10 0.01 625 Parking Lot ——————————57.6 0.01 < 0.005 58.1 Total ——————————676 0.11 0.01 683 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————619 0.10 0.01 625 Parking Lot ——————————57.6 0.01 < 0.005 58.1 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 38 / 65 Total ——————————676 0.11 0.01 683 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————102 0.02 < 0.005 103 Parking Lot ——————————9.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.63 Total ——————————112 0.02 < 0.005 113 4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————619 0.10 0.01 625 Parking Lot ——————————57.6 0.01 < 0.005 58.1 Total ——————————676 0.11 0.01 683 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————619 0.10 0.01 625 Parking Lot ——————————57.6 0.01 < 0.005 58.1 Total ——————————676 0.11 0.01 683 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————102 0.02 < 0.005 103 Parking Lot ——————————9.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.63 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 39 / 65 Total ——————————112 0.02 < 0.005 113 4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Parking Lot 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 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Parking Lot 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 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 54.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 54.6 Parking Lot 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 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 54.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 54.6 4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 40 / 65 Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Parking Lot 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 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Parking Lot 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 0.02 0.28 0.23 < 0.005 0.02 —0.02 0.02 —0.02 329 0.03 < 0.005 330 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 54.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 54.6 Parking Lot 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 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 54.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 54.6 4.3. Area Emissions by Source 4.3.2. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 41 / 65 —————————————2.25Consumer Products Architectura l Coatings 0.14 ————————————— Landscape Equipment 0.75 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Total 3.14 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Consumer Products 2.25 ————————————— Architectura l Coatings 0.14 ————————————— Total 2.40 ————————————— Annual —————————————— Consumer Products 0.41 ————————————— Architectura l Coatings 0.03 ————————————— Landscape Equipment 0.07 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 Total 0.50 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 4.3.1. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 42 / 65 Consumer Products 2.25 ————————————— Architectura l Coatings 0.14 ————————————— Landscape Equipment 0.75 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Total 3.14 0.04 4.56 < 0.005 0.01 —0.01 0.01 —0.01 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Consumer Products 2.25 ————————————— Architectura l Coatings 0.14 ————————————— Total 2.40 ————————————— Annual —————————————— Consumer Products 0.41 ————————————— Architectura l Coatings 0.03 ————————————— Landscape Equipment 0.07 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 Total 0.50 < 0.005 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 < 0.005 —< 0.005 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.54 4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use 4.4.2. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 43 / 65 Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 4.4.1. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 44 / 65 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————32.4 1.52 0.04 81.1 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————5.36 0.25 0.01 13.4 4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use 4.5.2. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 45 / 65 ——————————————Daily, Winter (Max) Home Improvement Superstore ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 4.5.1. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 46 / 65 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————622 62.1 0.00 2,175 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 Parking Lot ——————————0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total ——————————103 10.3 0.00 360 4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use 4.6.1. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.50 Total —————————————0.50 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.50 Total —————————————0.50 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.08 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 47 / 65 Total —————————————0.08 4.6.2. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.50 Total —————————————0.50 Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.50 Total —————————————0.50 Annual —————————————— Home Improvement Superstore —————————————0.08 Total —————————————0.08 4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type 4.7.1. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 48 / 65 Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.7.2. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type 4.8.1. Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 49 / 65 CO2eN2OCH4CO2TPM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGEquipment Type Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.8.2. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type 4.9.1. Unmitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 50 / 65 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.9.2. Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 51 / 65 4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 52 / 65 Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— Annual —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 53 / 65 Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— 4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— 4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Total —————————————— Annual —————————————— Total —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 54 / 65 4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e Daily, Summer (Max) —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— Daily, Winter (Max) —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— Annual —————————————— Avoided —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— Sequestere d —————————————— Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 55 / 65 Subtotal —————————————— Removed —————————————— Subtotal —————————————— ——————————————— 5. Activity Data 5.1. Construction Schedule Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 6/5/2023 6/23/2023 5.00 15.0 — Grading Grading 6/26/2023 7/14/2023 5.00 15.0 — Building Construction Building Construction 7/17/2023 3/15/2024 5.00 175 — Paving Paving 3/18/2024 3/29/2024 5.00 10.0 — Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/1/2024 4/5/2024 5.00 70.0 — 5.2. Off-Road Equipment 5.2.1. Unmitigated Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Graders Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 56 / 65 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 2 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37 Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 2 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 5.2.2. Mitigated Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Graders Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Tier 2 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 2 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh oes Diesel Tier 2 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37 Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 2 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 57 / 65 Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 2 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 2 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 5.3. Construction Vehicles 5.3.1. Unmitigated Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation ———— Site Preparation Worker 17.5 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Site Preparation Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT Grading ———— Grading Worker 15.0 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Grading Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Grading Hauling 50.0 20.0 HHDT Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT Building Construction ———— Building Construction Worker 33.6 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 17.2 4.00 HHDT,MHDT Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT Paving ———— Paving Worker 15.0 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Paving Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 58 / 65 Architectural Coating ———— Architectural Coating Worker 6.71 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Architectural Coating Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT 5.3.2. Mitigated Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation ———— Site Preparation Worker 17.5 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Site Preparation Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT Grading ———— Grading Worker 15.0 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Grading Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Grading Hauling 50.0 20.0 HHDT Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT Building Construction ———— Building Construction Worker 33.6 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 17.2 4.00 HHDT,MHDT Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT Paving ———— Paving Worker 15.0 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Paving Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 59 / 65 Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT Architectural Coating ———— Architectural Coating Worker 6.71 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Architectural Coating Vendor —4.00 HHDT,MHDT Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT 5.4. Vehicles 5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user. 5.5. Architectural Coatings Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Parking Area Coated (sq ft) Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 157,301 52,434 7,057 5.6. Dust Mitigation 5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards)Material Exported (Cubic Yards)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (sq. ft.)Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 22.5 0.00 — Grading 0.00 5,999 15.0 0.00 — Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.70 5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61%61% Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 60 / 65 5.7. Construction Paving Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt Home Improvement Superstore 0.00 0% Parking Lot 2.70 100% 5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh) Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O 2023 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005 2024 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005 5.9. Operational Mobile Sources 5.9.1. Unmitigated Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Home Improvement Superstore 311 311 311 113,500 1,830 1,830 1,830 667,848 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.9.2. Mitigated Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Home Improvement Superstore 311 311 311 113,500 1,830 1,830 1,830 667,848 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.10. Operational Area Sources Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 61 / 65 5.10.1. Hearths 5.10.1.1. Unmitigated 5.10.1.2. Mitigated 5.10.2. Architectural Coatings Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft)Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Parking Area Coated (sq ft) 0 0.00 157,301 52,434 7,057 5.10.3. Landscape Equipment Season Unit Value Snow Days day/yr 0.00 Summer Days day/yr 180 5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated Season Unit Value Snow Days day/yr 0.00 Summer Days day/yr 180 5.11. Operational Energy Consumption 5.11.1. Unmitigated Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Home Improvement Superstore 1,107,404 204 0.0330 0.0040 1,026,894 Parking Lot 103,028 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00 Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 62 / 65 5.11.2. Mitigated Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Home Improvement Superstore 1,107,404 204 0.0330 0.0040 1,026,894 Parking Lot 103,028 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00 5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption 5.12.1. Unmitigated Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year) Home Improvement Superstore 7,703,542 503,075 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 5.12.2. Mitigated Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year) Home Improvement Superstore 7,703,542 503,075 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 5.13. Operational Waste Generation 5.13.1. Unmitigated Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year) Home Improvement Superstore 1,153 0.00 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 5.13.2. Mitigated Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 63 / 65 Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year) Home Improvement Superstore 1,153 0.00 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment 5.14.1. Unmitigated Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Home Improvement Superstore Other commercial A/C and heat pumps R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0 Home Improvement Superstore Stand-alone retail refrigerators and freezers R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00 5.14.2. Mitigated Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Home Improvement Superstore Other commercial A/C and heat pumps R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0 Home Improvement Superstore Stand-alone retail refrigerators and freezers R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00 5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment 5.15.1. Unmitigated Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor 5.15.2. Mitigated Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 64 / 65 5.16. Stationary Sources 5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor 5.16.2. Process Boilers Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr) 5.17. User Defined Equipment Type Fuel Type —— 5.18. Vegetation 5.18.1. Land Use Change 5.18.1.1. Unmitigated Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres 5.18.1.2. Mitigated Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres 5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type 5.18.1.1. Unmitigated Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report, 2/23/2023 65 / 65 5.18.1.2. Mitigated Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres 5.18.2. Sequestration 5.18.2.1. Unmitigated Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) 5.18.2.2. Mitigated Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) 8. User Changes to Default Data Screen Justification Land Use Project would include a 104,867 sf furniture retail store in an 8-acre project site Construction: Construction Phases Construction would start in June 2023 and occur for 10 months. Overlap of building construction and architectural coating. Construction: Off-Road Equipment Default construction equipment with Tier 2 engine Operations: Vehicle Data Based on a trip generation of 311 ADT Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Appendix B Biological Resources Assessment March 8, 2023 Brian Saltikov, Senior Project Manager Real Estate Development 14501 Artesia Boulevard La Mirada, California 90638 Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Proposed Living Spaces Project located in City of Fresno, Fresno County, California Dear Mr. Saltikov, The purpose of this Biological Resources Assessment is to describe and document potential impacts to biological resources associated with the proposed Living Spaces Project (project) located at 3457 North Abby Street, southeast of the intersection of East Minarets/East Alluvial Avenue and North Abby Street, in the City of Fresno (City), Fresno County, California (refer to Figure 1; all figures provided in Attachment A). This technical information is provided for project review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and other pertinent environmental regulations. This letter report provides a biological resources impact analysis that reflects the current environmental setting, project design, and regulatory context. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on the site plan prepared by Ktgy Architecture and Planning, dated January 18, 2023, the project involves the construction and operation of an approximately 104,867-square-foot furniture retail store in the eastern portion of the site, associated, parking on the western portion and along the northeastern boundary of the site, and utility infrastructure. Access to the site would be provided from North Abby Street. In addition, the proposed project includes a potential access connection to the project site through the adjacent Kohl’s parking lot to East Alluvial Avenue which would require a cross-access covenant/agreement between the property owners of both parcels. The “project site” discussed in this report refers to all areas within the 7.75-acre property where temporary and permanent ground disturbance would occur. PROJECT SETTING The project site is located along the eastern portion of the San Joaquin Valley floor in Fresno County. Specifically, the project site is located on Assessor’s Parcel Number 303-201-27 in the northern quarter of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Fresno North, California, 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map (refer to Figure 1). The project site is currently undeveloped and contains one transformer/pad and a fire hydrant from the previous development (refer to Figure 2). According to historic aerial imagery, the project site was previous developed as Boomers Park (a family entertainment park) from approximately 1998 to 2017. In 2017, Boomers Park was demolished/cleared and the site has remained in its current condition since 2017. Adjacent parcels consist of North Abby Street to the west, a Kohl’s department store to the north, State Route (SR 41) to the east, and a Home Depot store to the south. Some CARLSBAD CLOVIS IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO LSA 2 lands in the vicinity of the project site are fallow/vacant lots; however, most of the lands are developed with a mixture of commercial developments, schools, and residential uses. There are no undisturbed open spaces in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is located within the San Joaquin Valley Sub-region of the California Floristic Province (Baldwin, et al. 2012) and within the Gates Lake watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code # 180300090701). The project site is flat with little topographic variation and is at approximately 352 feet (107 meters) above mean sea level in elevation. There are no drainage features, depressional wetlands, or riparian areas present in the project site or immediate surroundings. METHODS Literature Review and Records Search LSA Biologist Kelly McDonald conducted a literature review and records search on January 18, 2023, to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special-status plant and animal species 1 in the project vicinity. Federal and State lists of sensitive species were also examined. Current electronic database records reviewed included the following: • California Natural Diversity Data Base information (CNDDB – RareFind 5), which is administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), formerly known as the California Department of Fish and Game. This database covers sensitive plant and animal species, as well as sensitive natural communities that occur in California. Records from nine USGS quadrangles surrounding the project area (Gregg, Lanes Bridge, Friant, Herndon, Fresno North, Clovis, Malaga, Fresno South and Kearney Park ), along with a query of records within a 5- mile radius of the project site, were obtained from this database to inform the field survey. • California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants, which uses four specific categories or “lists” of sensitive plant species to assist with the conservation of rare or endangered botanical resources. Records from the nine USGS quadrangles surrounding the project site were obtained from this database to inform the field survey. • United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Online System, which lists all proposed, candidate, threatened, and endangered species managed by the Endangered Species Program of the USFWS that have the potential to occur on or near a particular site. This database also lists all designated critical habitats, national wildlife 1 For the purposed of this report, the term “special-status species” refers to those species that are listed or proposed for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and/or the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), California Fully Protected Species, and California Species of Special Concern. It should be noted that “Species of Special Concern” is an administrative designation made by the CDFW and carries no formal legal protection status. However, Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that these species should be included in an analysis of project impacts if they can be shown to meet the criteria of sensitivity outlined therein. LSA 3 refuges, and migratory birds that could potentially be impacted by activities from a proposed project. An IPaC Trust Resource Report (USFWS 2023a) was generated for the project site. • Designated and Proposed USFWS Critical Habitat Polygons were reviewed to determine whether critical habitat has been designated or proposed within or in the vicinity of the project site (USFWS 2023b). • The USFWS National Wetlands Inventory was reviewed to determine whether any wetlands or surface waters of the United States have been previously identified in the survey area (USFWS 2023c). • eBird: eBird is a real-time, online checklist program launched in 2002 by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society. It provides rich data sources for basic information on bird abundance and distribution at a variety of spatial and temporal scales. eBird occurrence records within the project sites and a 5-mile radius around the project site were reviewed in January 2023 (eBird 2023). In addition to the databases listed above, historic and current aerial imagery, and local land use policies related to biological resources were reviewed. Field Survey A general biological survey of the project site was conducted by LSA Biologist Kelly McDonald on January 19, 2023. The project site was surveyed on foot, and all biological resources observed were noted and mapped. Suitable habitat for any species of interest or concern was duly noted, and general site conditions were photographed (Attachment B, Site Photos). The field survey took place on an overcast morning with weather conditions conducive to the detection of plant and animal species. A series of rain events passed through the region in the weeks prior to the site survey. RESULTS This section summarizes the environmental setting and provides further analysis of the data collected in the field. Discussions regarding the existing project site conditions, soils, vegetation communities, potentially occurring special-status biological resources, and habitat connectivity are presented below. The project site consists of a flat area supporting disturbed non-native grassland. The vegetation existing on the site appears to be regularly maintained. There are a few small and immature Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta; non-native species) and interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni) trees are located along the fence line of the southern perimeter of the project site. Much of the soil and vegetation within the project site is disturbed from the demolition of Boomers Park in 2017. Worn foot paths, litter, vehicle tracks, and trampling are evident throughout the project site. No riparian habitat exists in the project site or on adjacent parcels and there are no depressional wetlands (e.g., vernal pools) or natural drainage features within the project site. The project site does not serve as a wildlife nursery or as a wildlife migration corridor. Further details regarding specific biological resources are provided in the following sections. LSA 4 Vegetation and Land Cover Types The project site is strictly upland in nature with dominant vegetation consisting of disturbed non- native grassland. Ongoing soil disturbance and the resulting competitive exclusion by invasive nonnative plants limit the potential for native flora to occur in the project site. No native or special- status vegetation communities exist in the project site. The acreages of each vegetation community and land cover type occurring in the project site are shown in Table A, below. Representative photographs of the project site are presented in Attachment B, and Figure 3 provides a map of these vegetation and land cover types within the project site. Table A: Vegetation and Land Cover Types Within the Project Site Vegetation / Land Cover Type Acreage1 Developed 0.001 Disturbed/Barren 2.12 Disturbed Non-Native Grassland 5.63 Total Acres 7.75 1 All presented acreages are approximate and based on geographic information system measurements. A total of 25 vascular plant species were identified within the project site during the January 2023 field survey. See Attachment C for a complete list of species identified on the project site. The following describes the vegetation and land cover types occurring within the project site: Developed: Developed areas consist of paved areas, buildings, and other areas that are cleared or graded for anthropogenic purposes. The transformer/pad and fire hydrant are the only developed features within the site. Disturbed/Barren: Based on an analysis of historical aerial imagery and observations during the survey, vehicles regularly park and drive throughout the site as evinced by tire tracks and ruts. These disturbed areas lacked vegetation or supported a sparse cover of ruderal vegetation, with nonnative grasses and Russian thistle (Salsola tragus) being the most frequently encountered plant species. Several other invasive, pioneering plant species were also observed in these areas. Disturbed Non-Native Grassland: This area classifies as disturbed non-native grassland due to evidence of litter, off-road vehicle tracks, worn foot paths, and previously graded areas from the demolition of the existing Boomers Park. Vegetation associated with disturbed non-native grassland consist of nonnative grasses and pioneering herbaceous plants that readily colonize disturbed ground. Nonnative grasses are present which include brome grasses (Bromus sp.), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), wild oats (Avena fatua), and Dallis grass (Paspalum dilatatum). Other dominant plants within this area include weedy or pioneering species such as: prickly lettuce (Sonchus asper), Russian thistle, Musky stork's bill (Erodium moschatum), and Shepherd’s purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris). A few small and immature Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta; non-native species) and interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni) occur along the fence line of the southern perimeter of the project site. LSA 5 Soils According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) online soil survey of Eastern Fresno County, the project site is composed of San Joaquin loam, shallow, 0 to 3 percent slopes as shown on Figure 4 and described in Table Be below. Table B: Soil Type Information Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Parent Material Drainage Class Hydric SgA San Joaquin loam, shallow, 0 to 3 percent slopes Alluvium derived from granite Moderately well drained No Compiled: NRCS (January 2023) Wildlife A total of seven wildlife species were observed on or near the project site during the January 2023 survey, including: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris; nonnative species), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). Each of the wildlife species observed commonly occur in and around developed areas throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Migratory bird species may utilize the project site for foraging; however, the usage is likely transient and limited to species that forage over open areas. The project site does not possess any characteristics that would indicate a locally significant stopover point for migratory species including raptors or waterfowl. No known wildlife movement corridors occur within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. SPECIAL-STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Fresno region supports various special-status natural communities, plants, and animals. Attachment D provides tables that identify those special-status plant and animal species known to occur or that potentially occur in the vicinity of the project site (based on the literature review and experience in the region) and includes detailed information about each species’ habitat and distribution, State and Federal status designations, and probability of occurrence within the project site. As stated in the methodology section above, the background research included occurrence records from nine USGS topographic quadrangles surrounding the survey area. A nine USGS quadrangle search covers a large, variable geographic and topographic area containing numerous habitat types not found within or around the project site. The following species are not included in Attachment D because suitable nesting habitat does not occur in the project site or in the immediate vicinity, or the project site is outside of the species’ known current range: great egret (Ardea alba; nesting colonies), snowy egret (Egretta thula; nesting colonies), double-crested cormorant (Nannopterum auritum; nesting colonies), and black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax; nesting colonies). The following subsections provide specific discussions for special-status natural communities, plant and animal species, and habitats of concern (including critical habitat, jurisdictional aquatic resources, wildlife movement corridors, and regional and local habitat conservation plans). LSA 6 Special-Status Natural Communities The CNDDB search identified occurrences of four special-status natural (i.e., plant) communities, Great Valley mixed Riparian Forest, Northern Claypan Vernal Pool, Norther Hardpan Verna Pool, and Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, within the nine-quad search area.1 These habitat types do not occur within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. No special-status natural communities or conservation areas exist within the project site or in adjacent parcels. The project site is completely isolated and distant from all special-status natural communities that occur in the region. Special-Status Plants Attachment D contains tables that identify special-status species known to occur or that potentially occur in the vicinity of the project site and include detailed information about each species’ habitat and distribution, activity period, listing/status designations, and probability of occurrence within the project site boundaries. These species were compiled from the CNPS, CNDDB, and IPaC records searches from a 5-mile radius around the project site and from LSA’s extensive knowledge and experience in the region. The literature review identified 14 special-status plant species that are known to occur within a nine-quad radius of the project site (refer to Attachment D). The majority of the rare plant species that were identified in the databases have specialized habitat requirements (i.e., they occur on predominantly alkaline soils, vernal pools, riparian, or wetland habitats, etc.) that do not occur within the project site. Historic anthropogenic disturbances have greatly altered the natural hydrologic regimes and have either eliminated or greatly impacted the pre-settlement habitats needed to support the special- status plant species identified in the CNDDB and CNPS queries. As such, the specific habitats, soil substrates or “micro-climates” necessary for special-status plant species to occur are absent within the boundaries of the project site. Based on site observations coupled with the habitat suitability analysis, no special-status plant species are expected to occur within the project site. It is also unlikely that any source populations exist in adjacent or nearby parcels. Special-Status Animals The historic anthropogenic disturbances in the project site and adjacent parcels (i.e., urban development, roads and highways, etc.) have greatly altered, eliminated, or impacted the pre- settlement habitats needed to support most of the special-status animal species identified in the CNDDB and USFWS queries (refer to Attachment D). There are no known occurrences of any special- status animal species in the project site, and none were observed during the January 2023 field survey. Nonetheless, marginally suitable, isolated habitat for several regionally occurring special- status species is present in the project site and those species are discussed in further detail below. 1 The CNDDB uses sensitive vegetation community names described in the Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986). No new sensitive natural community records have been added to the CNDDB since the 1990s. Therefore, natural communities mapped by the CNDDB are limited. LSA 7 One special-status animal species, burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) has low potential to occur in the project site due to the presence of potentially suitable habitat and/or known records in the project vicinity. However, no sign which would indicate occupation or use by this species (e.g., scat, tracks, whitewash, prey remains, or any other sign) was identified. Several small mammal burrows, including active California ground squirrel burrows were observed within the disturbed non-native grassland habitats in the project site. None of the small mammal burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows, although the species is highly mobile and there is some potential for use by these species in the future. The project site contains marginal foraging habitat for certain raptors such as the Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), although suitable tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent from the project site. The Mexican fan palms and interior live oaks trees are immature and small in stature and do not provide conducive nesting habitat for Swainson’s hawk or other raptor species. Suitable avian nesting habitat in the project site is mostly limited to that which supports ground-nesting species such as California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) and other birds that may nest on the ground or in the annual herbaceous cover. Mature Palm and oak trees in the vicinity and along the perimeter outside of the site in the adjacent parcels could be used by raptors and other tree-nesting species. Overall, the project site and immediate surroundings contain foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species that are protected while nesting under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. The evaluation of special-status animal species occurrence within the project site was based on a habitat suitability analysis. It did not include exhaustive surveys to determine their presence or absence, but did include direct observation of on-site and off-site conditions and a review of the available recorded occurrence data from the area to conclude whether or not a particular species could be expected to occur. Based on this analysis, it is unlikely that the remaining special-status wildlife species listed in Attachment D would occupy or otherwise utilize the habitat present within the project site. Significant adverse impacts to special-status wildlife species are not anticipated with the implementation of the recommended impact avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures described in further detail below. Critical Habitat The project site is not located within designated critical habitat for any species. Wetlands and Potential Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources The project site is strictly upland in nature with moderately well-drained soils. Based on historical aerial imagery, an irrigation ditch was historically located on the western side of the site. However, the ditch was either placed underground or rerouted prior to 1998. There are no wetlands, riparian areas, or potential jurisdictional drainage features currently present within the project site. Wildlife Movement and Habitat Connectivity The project site is isolated from natural areas and it is unlikely that the site serves as an important corridor for animals moving locally, regionally, or in broader migrations. Migratory bird species may utilize the project site for foraging; however, the usage is likely transient and limited to species that LSA 8 forage over open grassland areas. The project site does not possess any characteristics that would indicate a locally significant stopover point for migratory species including raptors or waterfowl. No known wildlife movement corridors occur within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Regional Habitat Conservation Plans and Local Policies The City of Fresno and Fresno County currently does not have a regional Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) or Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The 2030 General Plan for the City of Fresno outlines local relevant policies related to biological resources. Below is the list of relevant polices from the City of Fresno General Plan: • Parks Open Space and Schools (POSS)-5-a Habitat Area Acquisition. Support federal, State, and local programs to acquire significant habitat areas for permanent protection and/or conjunctive educational and recreational use. • POSS-5-b Habitat Conservation Plans. Participate in cooperative, multijurisdictional approaches for area-wide habitat conservation plans to preserve and protect rare, threatened, and endangered species. • POSS-5-c Buffers for Natural Areas. Require development projects, where appropriate and warranted, to incorporate natural features (such as ponds, hedgerows, and wooded strips) to serve as buffers for adjacent natural areas with high ecological value. • POSS-5-d Guidelines for Habitat Conservation. Establish guidelines for habitat conservation and mitigation programs, including: o Protocols for the evaluation of a site's environmental setting and proposed design and operating parameters of proposed mitigation measures. o Methodology for the analysis depiction of land to be acquired or set aside for mitigation activities. o Parameters for specification of the types and sources of plant material used for any re-vegetation, irrigation requirements, and post-planting maintenance and other operational measures to ensure successful mitigation. o Monitoring at an appropriate frequency by qualified personnel and reporting of data collected to permitting agencies. • POSS-5-e Pursue development of conjunctive habitat and recreational trail uses in flood control and drainage projects. • POSS-5-f Regional Mitigation and Habitat Restoration. Coordinate habitat restoration programs with responsible agencies to take advantage of opportunities for a coordinated regional mitigation program. LSA 9 • POSS-5-g Assistance in Valley Arboretum Master Planning. Assist community organizations that have raised grant funds to pursue the preparation of a Valley Arboretum Master Plan and Implementation Program, including funding, to be coordinated with community groups, as well as related plans and policies for established neighborhoods and other areas with park deficiencies. • POSS-6-a San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan. Support the San Joaquin River Conservancy in its efforts to update the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan by working with the other jurisdictions and the River Conservancy to create a comprehensive and feasible plan for preservation, conservation, and Parkway development. • POSS-6-b Effects of Stormwater Discharge. Support efforts to identify and mitigate cumulative adverse effects on aquatic life from stormwater discharge to the San Joaquin River. o Avoid discharge of runoff from urban uses to the San Joaquin River or other riparian corridors. o Approve development on sites having drainage (directly or indirectly) to the San Joaquin River or other riparian areas only upon a finding that adequate measures for preventing pollution of natural bodies of water from their runoff will be implemented. o Periodically monitor water quality and sediments near drainage outfalls to riparian areas. Institute remedial measures promptly if unacceptable levels of contaminant(s) occur. According to the Landscape Plan, two trees located outside the project site will be removed as part of the connection to the proposed driveways along East Alluvial Avenue. The current landscaping along the southern perimeter of the project site will remain in place. However, the two trees proposed to be removed might be subject to the City of Fresno’s tree removal permit as described the City of Fresno Municipal Code Article 23 Landscape (City of Fresno 2023). If the trees to be removed are fruit trees and trees of the genus Myrtaceae with a 12-inch diameter or 38-inch circumference, those trees are considered protected. The applicant would follow the guidelines outlined in Article 23 Landscape, Section 15-2308, D. Tree Removal Permit/Application Requirements. IMPACT FINDINGS Special-Status Natural Communities The project site does not contain any special-status natural communities and such habitats would not be impacted by the proposed project. No mitigation is required. Special-Status Species No special-status plant species are expected to occur within the project site or to be adversely affected by the proposed project, and no mitigation is required. LSA 10 While no special-status animal species (or signs of such species) were observed on site during the January 2023 survey, California ground squirrel burrows that could be used by burrowing owl were observed in portions of the project site. None of the California ground squirrel burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey, although there is some potential for use by this species in the future. Potentially significant direct and/or indirect impacts, including mortality, harassment, or other forms of incidental take, could occur if construction-related ground disturbance occurs in or around an occupied burrow. While suitable habitat for shrub and tree nesting birds is almost absent on the project site (only small immature Mexican fan palm and interior live oaks occur along the perimeter of the site), the project site and immediate surroundings that could be subjected to indirect disturbances during construction do contain suitable nesting habitat for a variety of tree and ground-nesting birds and for other birds that could nest in the annual herbaceous vegetation. Nesting birds are protected under the California Fish and Game Code. Construction activities that occur during the nesting bird season (typically February 15 through September 15) have potential to result in the direct or indirect take of nesting birds. If unmitigated or avoided, these potential direct and indirect impacts on special-status wildlife species and nesting birds could be considered potentially significant. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-2, as summarized below, would effectively mitigate any impacts on special-status wildlife species to less-than-significant levels. Critical Habitat The project would not result in any impacts to designated critical habitat, and no additional mitigation is required. Wetlands and other Aquatic Resources The project would not result in any impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources, and no mitigation is required. Wildlife Movement The proposed project would not place any barriers within any known wildlife movement corridors or interfere with habitat connectivity, and no mitigation related to wildlife movement is required. Regional Habitat Conservation Plans and Local Polices Because the project would not impact any sensitive biological resources, special-status species, or jurisdictional aquatic features, the project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. If any tree removal is expected to occur, the applicant would be subject to the Article 23 Landscape, Section 15-2308, D. Tree Removal Permit/Application Requirements, therefore making the project not conflict any tree removal policies. RECOMMENDED IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURE The following measure is recommended to be implemented to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate impacts on nesting birds. LSA 11 Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Conduct Preconstruction Clearance Surveys for Burrowing Owl. A preconstruction clearance survey is required for burrowing owl no more than 30 calendar days prior to initiation of project activities. All survey results must be delivered to the City of Fresno. If an active burrowing owl burrow is found within the project site, the applicant must coordinate with CDFW to obtain applicable agency approval/direction prior to any ground disturbance activities on the site. Specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW. If no active burrowing owl burrows are identified, project activities may proceed as planned following the preconstruction survey. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. If vegetation removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to occur within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than 5 days prior to the start of such activities. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by project-related activities such as noise, vibration, increased human activity, and dust, etc. For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active by the qualified biologist. Documentation of all survey results shall be provided to the City. CONCLUSION Based on field observations coupled with the habitat suitability analysis conducted for this assessment, the project is not expected to impact regionally occurring special-status plant or wildlife species. The project would not impact any special-status natural communities, jurisdictional aquatic features, or other habitats of concern. Successful implementation of the recommended avoidance measures defined above (BIO-1 and BIO-2) would avoid impacts on burrowing owl and nesting birds and ensure compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and applicable provisions of the California Fish and Game Code. If you have any questions regarding this letter report, please contact Kelly McDonald at (805) 782- 0745. Sincerely, LSA Associates, Inc. LSA 12 Attachments: A: Figures 1-4 B: Representative Site Photographs C: Vascular Plant Species Observed D: Summary of Special-Status Species LSA 13 REFERENCES Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, eds. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Special Animals List. January 2023. Periodic publication. ______. 2023b. State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife Biogeographic Data Branch. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Rarefind Version 5. January 2023. Rarefind query of the USGS 7.5-minute quads nine-quad review area – Gregg, Lanes Bridge, Friant, Herndon, Fresno North, Clovis, Malaga, Fresno South and Kearney Park and GIS query of occurrences within a 5-mile buffer (project vicinity). California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2023. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition v8). Available at: http://cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/inventory/. January 2023. City of Fresno. 2014. City of Fresno General Plan, Parks, Open Space, and Schools. ______. 2023. City of Fresno Municipal Code Article 23 Landscape. January 2023. eBird. 2022. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available at: http://www.ebird.org (accessed January 2023). Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)). 2023. “Current Implementation of Waters of the United States Section 401. Website: https:// https://www.epa.gov/wotus/current-implementation-waters-united-states. Google Earth. 2023. Aerial images of the project site and environs from August 1998, July 2002, December 2002, May 2004, July 2004, August 2005, August 2006, June 2009, September 2010, April 2011, August 2012, August 2017, February 2018, September 2019, May 2020, July 2020, August 2020, September 2020, November 2020, January 2021, April 2021, June 2021, March 2022, and June 2022. Holland. 1986. California Department of Fish and Game: Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2023. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Sawyer, J., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. Evans. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation. 2nd edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 1,300 pp. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State [For Inclusion in the Water LSA 14 Quality Control Plans for Inland Surface Waters and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries and Ocean Waters of California]. Adopted April 2, 2019. Effective May 28, 2020. Website: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/docs/procedures_confor med.pdf. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/ (accessed January 2023). ______. 2023a. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Trust Resources Report. January 2023. Available at: http://ecos.fws. gov/ecp/. ______. 2023b. USFWS Critical Habitat Polygons. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. January 2023. ______. 2023c. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Online Mapper Tool. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html. LSA B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A SSESSMENT M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT A FIGURES 1-4 Figure 1: Regional and Project Location Figure 2: Project Site Figure 3: Vegetation and Land Cover Figure 4: Soils LSA B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A SSESSMENT M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT B REPRESENTATIVE SITE PHOTOGRAPHS LSA B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A SSESSMENT M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT C VASCULAR PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED LSA B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A SSESSMENT M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA VASCULAR PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED The following vascular plant species were observed in the project site by LSA biologist Kelly McDonald on January 19, 2023. * introduced species not native to California EUDICOTS Asteraceae Sunflower Family Amsinckia intermedia Common fiddleneck Centaurea solstitialis* Yellow-star thistle Erigeron canadensis Canada horseweed Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed Lactuca serriola* Prickly lettuce Senecio vulgari* Common groundsel Sonchus asper* Prickly sow thistle Brassicaceae Mustard Family Capsella bursa-pastoris* Shepherd’s purse Lepidium didymium* Lesser swine cress Caryophyllaceae Pink Family Stellaria media * Chickweed Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Family Salsola tragus* Russian thistle Fabaceae Pea Family Trifolium sp.* Clover Fagaceae Beech Family Quercus wislizeni Interior live oak Geraniaceae Geranium Family Erodium botrys* Broad leaf filaree Erodium moschatum* Musky stork's bill Lamiaceae Mint Family Rosmarinus officinalis* Rosemary Oleaceae Olive Family Ligustrum lucidum* Glossy privet Rosaceae Rose Family Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Solanaceae Nightshade family Datura wrightii Jimsonweed Solanum americanum American black nightshade MONOCOTS Arecaceae Palm Family Washingtonia robusta* Mexican fan palm Poaceae Grass Family Avena fatua* Wild oat Bromus diandrus* Ripgut brome Bromus sp.* Brome grass Paspalum dilatatum* Dallis grass LSA B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A SSESSMENT M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT D SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES LSA Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Appendix C Cultural Resources Survey CARLSBAD CLOVIS IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 285 South Street, Suite P, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.782.0745 www.lsa.net March 7, 2023 Brian Saltikov, Senior Project Manager Living Spaces Real Estate Development 14501 Artesia Boulevard La Mirada, California 90638 Subject: Cultural Resources Survey Study for the Living Spaces Project in Fresno, Fresno County, California (LSA Project No. LSP2201) Dear Mr. Saltikov: LSA conducted a cultural resources survey study (study) for the proposed Living Spaces Project (project) in Fresno, Fresno County, California. Study work (which consisted of background research and a field survey) was completed per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA). This study was prepared to: (1) identify archaeological deposits that may meet the CEQA definition of a historical resource (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21084.1) or a unique archaeological resource (PRC Section 21083.2) and that may be impacted by the proposed project; (2) assess the potential for human remains; and (3) recommend best practices and procedures that may be utilized with respect to archaeological resources, if warranted. This report has been prepared by Associate/Senior Cultural Resources Manager Kerrie Collison, M.A., Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) 28731436. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The approximately 8-acre project site is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Fresno North, California 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map in Section 33 of Township 12 South, Range 20 East, Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian (USGS 1981; Figure 1 [all figures are provided in Attachment B). It consists of the entirety of Assessor’s Parcel Number 303-201-27, southeast of the intersection of East Minarets/East Alluvial Avenue and North Abby Street (Figure 2). The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a furniture retail store in the eastern portion of the project site, associated parking on the western portion and along the northeastern boundary of the project site, and utility infrastructure. Access to the project site would be provided from North Abby Street. In addition, the proposed project includes a potential access connection to the project site through the adjacent Kohl’s parking lot to East Alluvial Avenue, which would require a cross-access covenant/agreement between the property owners of both parcels. BACKGROUND RESEARCH Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center On January 23, 2023, Celeste M. Thomson (Coordinator at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center [SSJVIC]) conducted a record search at the SSJVIC of the California Historical Resources Information System at California State University, Bakersfield. The SSJVIC, an affiliate of LSA 3/7/23 «P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx» 2 the California Office of Historic Preservation, is the official repository of cultural resource records and reports for Fresno County. The record search included a review of all recorded historic-period and prehistoric cultural resources within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site, as well as a review of known cultural resource surveys and excavation reports. The record search results (SSJVIC File No. 23-017; Attachment C) indicate that two previous cultural resources studies included a portion or the entirety of the project site and that six previous cultural resources studies have included a portion of the 0.5-mile search radius. The previous cultural studies that included a portion and the entirety of the project site (FR-00384 and FR-00577, respectively) were both surveys. The six previous studies (FR-00383, FR-00398, FR-01572, FR-01685, FR-02568, and FR-02955) were also surveys. An estimated 50 percent of the project site and 0.5-mile radius has been studied. As a result of previous cultural resources studies, no cultural resources have been recorded in the project site or within 0.5 mile. Aerial Photographs and Maps Aerial photographs and historic maps that include the project site were also reviewed (USGS n.d.; NETR n.d.). The results of the review are presented in Table A. Table A: Aerial Photograph and Historic Map Review Map/Photograph Results 1921 Bullard, California map (Scale 1:31,680) The project site is not developed with any buildings. 1946 Fresno North, California map (Scale 1:24,000) The project site is not developed with any buildings. 1955 Fresno, California map (Scale 1:250,000) The project site is not developed with any buildings. 1957 aerial photograph The project site not developed with any buildings. A seeming man-made irrigation channel transects the project site. 1962 aerial photograph No change from the 1957 aerial photograph. 1965 Herndon, California map (Scale 1:62,500) The project site is not developed with any buildings. 1972 and 1984 aerial photographs No change from the 1957 aerial photograph. 1998 aerial photograph The project site has been developed as a Boomers Park (a family entertainment park). 2016 aerial photograph The project site remains a Boomers Park. 2018 aerial photograph Boomers Park has been demolished, and the project site has been cleared of all buildings and parking lots. Compiled by LSA (2023) from United States Geological Survey (n.d.) and National Environmental Title Research (n.d.). Native American Heritage Commission LSA submitted a request to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the presence of Native American cultural resources that the proposed project might impact. The NAHC maintains the SLF database and is the official State repository of Native American sacred-site location records in California. LSA 3/7/23 «P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx» 3 Cameron Vela, NAHC Cultural Resources Analyst, responded on February 7, 2023, that the SLF search resulted in negative findings for sacred lands in the vicinity of the project site (Attachment D). Additional Background Research Soil surveys (USDA n.d.) indicate that near surficial natural sediments within the project site are entirely San Joaquin loam, which typically consist of loam from 0 to 18 inches deep, clay from 18 to 22 inches deep, cemented material from 22 to 36 inches deep, and coarse sandy loam from 36 to 60 inches deep. Geologic deposits exist under surficial sediments of the project site, specifically older alluvium, lake, playa, and terrace deposits that date to the Pleistocene (2.58 million to 11,700 years ago) (CGS 2015). While not mapped by soil surveys, artificial fill is also likely present on the project site as a result of the prior construction of Boomers Park and associated infrastructure. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY On February 10, 2023, LSA archaeologist Kerrie Collison conducted a pedestrian survey of the project site. The survey was conducted utilizing transects spaced fewer than 10 meters apart and included the entire project site, with special attention paid to rodent burrow holes and aprons. It was noted that the project site mainly consists of gravel, maintained nonnative grasses, and bladed dirt and gravel roads. Existing infrastructure (such as a hydrant; Photograph 1) and a utility access box were observed, both of which indicate the occurrence of previous ground disturbance for installation of utility lines. Ground visibility was approximately 40 percent overall due to gravel and grass ground cover (Photograph 2). No archaeological cultural resources were identified during the field survey. Photograph 1: Existing hydrant in center of project site. View northeast. LSA 3/7/23 «P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx» 4 Photograph 2: Example ground cover within project site. View west. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study consisted of background research and a field survey. No human remains or archaeological resources were identified within the project site as a result of the cultural resources survey study. Given the heavy previous disturbance of the project site (evidenced by aerial photograph records of the construction of Boomers Park between 1984 and 1998 and the remnant hydrants and utility access boxes), it is unlikely that construction activities associated with project implementation will impact cultural resources. Given the above factors, the potential for the project to impact cultural resources is low, and no further cultural studies are recommended for this project. However, LSA recommends the following steps be implemented to address the inadvertent discovery of prehistoric (Native American) or historic-period archaeological resources and to address the inadvertent discovery of human remains: • In the event that archaeological resources are identified during project activities, work shall be halted immediately within 25 meters of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist is contacted to assess the nature and significance of the find and determine if any additional study or treatment of the find is warranted. The archaeologist shall develop proper mitigation measures required for the discovery per California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(f)). Additional studies could include, but would not be limited to, collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. If determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist, archaeological monitoring shall commence and LSA ; ' m as :;'. £afiaitSfe-.v £• • .I• -yi*1 n :-•Mi______:_ 3/7/23 «P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx» 5 continue until grading and excavation are complete or until the monitoring archaeologist determines, based on field observations and in consultation with the qualified archaeologist, that there is little likelihood of encountering additional archaeological cultural resources. Archaeological monitoring may be reduced from full-time to part-time or spot-checking if determined appropriate by the qualified archaeologist based on monitoring results. Upon completion of any monitoring activities, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of monitoring activities. The final version of this report shall be submitted to the SSJVIC. • In the event that human remains are encountered at any time during project work, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Fresno County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to State PRC Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner would notify the NAHC within 24 hours, which would determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD’s recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials, preservation of Native American human remains and associated items in place, relinquishment of Native American human remains and associated items to the descendants for treatment, or any other culturally appropriate treatment. If you have any questions concerning the content of this letter report, please contact me at kerrie.collison@lsa.net. Sincerely, LSA Associates, Inc. Kerrie Collison, M.A., RPA 28731436 Associate/Senior Cultural Resources Manager Attachments: A—References B—Figures 1 and 2 C—Record Search Results D—Sacred Lands File Search Results LSA C ULTURAL R ESOURCES S URVEY S TUDY M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx «03/07/23» ATTACHMENT A REFERENCES California Geological Survey (CGS) 2015 Geologic Map of California. Website: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/gmc/ (accessed March 2, 2023). National Environmental Title Research (NETR) n.d. Historic Aerials. Website: http://www.historicaerials.com (accessed March 2, 2023). United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA) n.d. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed March 2, 2023). United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1981 Fresno North, California 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. Prepared in 1965. Photorevised in 1981. Denver, Colorado. n.d. USGS topoView. Website: https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#4/39.98/-100.02 (accessed March 2, 2023). LSA C ULTURAL R ESOURCES S URVEY S TUDY M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx «03/07/23» ATTACHMENT B FIGURES 1 AND 2 LSA SOURCE: USGS Fresno North (1981), CA J:\LSP2201\GIS\Pro\Living Spaces Fresno Project\Living Spaces Fresno Project.aprx (1/13/2023) FIGURE 1 Living Spaces Fresno Project M A D E R A C O U N T Y F R E S N O C O U N T Y ÃÃ145 ÃÃ168 ÃÃ180 ÃÃ41 ÃÃ99 Project Vicinity 0 1000 2000 FEET Project Location Project Location ■r A * ,V |.— Port biDCtOOon LincolnSch--S TEAQUE ------/ 1*5\28 *D/rcH cF(r SLAVONIAN Well 363 155 161 MD 3W,S ' •/ Bsr ■ '• Weil155Scwagi 15Disposal Tra Parks♦* * £*ft.3433tUVIAL JSS • •AV£' •Chicot A. 3 CANAL%ft BM i soTTT 3SfM'.NA wrWT Well151OS -8 Drive TMMMO: r-: i: :i ^&k FireHS.BNDO M St*A VC LHL-1 ■-• I ••••••■ 4lt WellJJ6: :<* .——:—- jV\L L* i =J 1 -;i■' . I u"23lLTI\1i— AVE Well ill ■ "i~r> ./'• .- I Ifni3IP?-••fc/• n•4! StEBBA ,J,o \ ■ li w ! F3JfcfIU ii----------------------------M *ei HrB.aM• c=e ••ras b—1 ^fcni t .r.. til... flKi **!lJS. ■ r. MU-L.1^:;-------------------iT,eF • •>>--■auLO<M:Slij^ *1 ■■■['•• r -t ’ItI T ]KJO 5 Li*_____ LSA Spruce Ave Birch Ave Abby StMinarets Ave Pinedale Ave Abby StÃÃ41 SOURCE: Google Imagery (2020) J:\LSP2201\GIS\Pro\Living Spaces Fresno Project\Living Spaces Fresno Project.aprx (1/13/2023) FIGURE 2 Living Spaces Fresno Project0 100 200 FEET Project Location Project Site-©-►■• 'WJtMcSjCO>r• 1--7-*"5-ir-l|!‘f 3Ir* uIfft*;f.■■%n. .Krv» <*»I' #>?%-«<ill1 ■ III II»■ . *_ -ill?/*>- '■ •-• ”"* *LT■-‘A««1 *■ « — C ULTURAL R ESOURCES S URVEY S TUDY M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx «03/07/23» ATTACHMENT C RECORD SEARCH RESULTS LSA 1/23/2023 Kerrie Collison LSA 285 South Street, Suite P San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Living Spaces Fresno Project (LSP2201) Records Search File No.: 23-017 The Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center received your record search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Fresno North USGS 7.5’ quad. The following reflects the results of the records search for the project area and the 0.5 mile radius: As indicated on the data request form, the locations of resources and reports are provided in the following format: ☒ custom GIS maps ☐ GIS data Resources within project area: None Archaeological resources within 0.5 mile radius: None Reports within project area: FR-00384, 00577 Reports within 0.5 mile radius: FR-00383, 00398, 01572, 01685, 02568, 02955 Note: Report locations in the project radius were omitted, per the Data Request Form. Resource Database Printout (list): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Resource Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Resource Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (list): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (details): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Record Copies: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed ☐ not available Report Copies: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed ☐ not available Note: OHP Built Environment Resources Directory: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed CA Inventory of Historic Resources (1976): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Note: P-15-007046 is not listed in the BERD. The 2013 HPD page was included for this resource. California Historical Resources _I_n formation _S y stem Fresno Kern Kings Madera Tulare Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center California State University, Bakersfield Mail Stop: 72 DOB 9001 Stockdale Highway Bakersfield, California 93311-1022 (661) 654-2289 E-mail: ssjvic@csub.edu Website: www.csub.edu/ssjvic Caltrans Bridge Survey: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmental-analysis/cultural-studies/california-historical-bridges-tunnels Ethnographic Information: Not available at SSJVIC Historical Literature: Not available at SSJVIC Historical Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/ Local Inventories: Not available at SSJVIC GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx#searchTabIndex=0&searchByTypeIndex=1 and/or http://www.oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb8489p15p;developer=local;style=oac4;doc.view=items Shipwreck Inventory: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://www.slc.ca.gov/shipwrecks/ Soil Survey Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Please forward a copy of any resulting reports from this project to the office as soon as possible. Due to the sensitive nature of archaeological site location data, we ask that you do not include resource location maps and resource location descriptions in your report if the report is for public distribution. If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at the phone number listed above. The provision of CHRIS Data via this records search response does not in any way constitute public disclosure of records otherwise exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act or any other law, including, but not limited to, records related to archeological site information maintained by or on behalf of, or in the possession of, the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, or the State Historical Resources Commission. Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the CHRIS Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts. Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the record search number listed above when making inquiries. Invoices for Information Center services will be sent under separate cover from the California State University, Bakersfield Accounting Office. Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). Sincerely, Celeste M. Thomson Coordinator FR-00577 FR-00577 FR-00384 FR-00383 FR-02568 FR-01685 FR-02955 FR-00398FR-01572May depict confidential cultural resource locations. Do not distribute.Ü00.1 0.20.05 Miles 0 0.15 0.30.075 Kilometers SSJV Information Center R ecord Search 23-017 Requester: Kerrie Collison, LSA Project Name: Living Spaces Fresno Project (LS P2201) USGS 7.5' Quad(s): Fresno North County: Fresno Project Area Record Search radius 7s& 'Mr >w /35 0/&rf [/Jo /*/NEES*J 3 58 KPc. L?UJ00/ (La:V UiKK2hOO Uj 44 X 3 AALLUVIAL K A/-£ixJ 3 50 — M//V.4 /E 4VE% ISTS »RUC. I i oaSFaj 9r 7 a:SrFIR 1zV$- 55! 338343■ « ■ • • ■ ■ •« ■ *i.'-J PiF Well 336 O' i3 :IB» *• •li ■■ ■o£to r(Tr5cT Y/ Ui^ Pai QcOk34k 33-5mr$SIERRA K i. J!1BM• •«336 ij-.,: E □ □I I I I I I L I I I I I I I I I Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SSJVIC Record Search 23-017 FR-00383 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance for the Friant Road Realignment, Fresno County, California California State University, Fresno Cursi, Kathleen L. and Varner, Dudley M. FR-00384 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance for the Riverpark Properties, Fresno County, California California State University, Fresno Cursi, Kathleen L. and Varner, Dudley M. FR-00398 1983 Archaeological and Historical Survey for Fresno Street Widening - West Bullard t West Herndon Avenue - An Interim Capacity Project California State University, Bakersfield Granskog, Jane FR-00577 1980 Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Extension of Route 41; 06-Fre-41, 29.5/33.02; 06100-025650 California Department of Transportation O'Connor, DeniseCaltrans - 06-FRE-41 PM 29.5/33.02 EA 06100-025650 FR-01572 1994 Supplemental Historic Proerpty Survey Report Corridor Study and Route Adoption in Norhtern Fresno County and Southern Madera County California Department of Transportation UnknownCaltrans - 06-Fre-41, P.M. 31.3/33.4; 06- Mad-41 P.M. 0.0/10.4; EA 06- 263200 FR-01685 2000 Cultural Resources Assessment of the Pacific Bell Site, CV-604-02, and Pinedale Site, City of Fresno, Fresno County, California Peak & Associates, Inc.Peak, Melinda A. FR-02568 2013 New Tower Submission Packet, FCC Form 620, for Blackstone Avenue & Alluvial Avenue, CN2711 EarthTouch, Inc.Billat, LornaSubmitter - Project Name: Blackstone Avenue & Alluvial Avenue; Submitter - Project Number: CN2711 FR-02955 2018 Cultural Resource Records Seaarch and Site Visit Results for Cellco Partnership and their Controlled Affiliates doing Business as Verizon Wireless Candidate Abbt & Spruce- E, 75 E. Pinedale Avenue, Fresno, Fresno County, California (EBI Project # 6118001727) Heliz Environmental Planning Davis, Shane K. and Wills, Carrie D. OHP PRN - FCC_2018_0503_003 Page 1 of 1 SSJVIC 1/17/2023 9:22:40 AM C ULTURAL R ESOURCES S URVEY S TUDY M ARCH 2023 L IVING S PACES P ROJECT F RESNO, F RESNO C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA P:\LSP2201-Living_Spaces\BACKGROUND\Cultural\Letter report\Living Spaces Cultural letter report.docx «03/07/23» ATTACHMENT D SACRED LANDS FILE SEARCH RESULTS LSA STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor NATIVE A MERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION Page 1 of 1 February 7, 2023 Kerrie Collison LSA Via Email to: Kerrie.Collison@lsa.net Re: Living Spaces Fresno Project, Fresno County Dear Ms. Collison: A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites. Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, p lease notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: Cameron.vela@nahc.ca.gov. Sincerely, Cameron Vela Cultural Resources Analyst Attachment CHAIRPERSON Laura Miranda Luiseño VICE CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Chumash SECRETARY Sara Dutschke Miwok COMMISSIONER Isaac Bojorquez Ohlone-Costanoan COMMISSIONER Buffy McQuillen Yokayo Pomo, Yuki, Nomlaki COMMISSIONER Wayne Nelson Luiseño COMMISSIONER Stanley Rodriguez Kumeyaay COMMISSIONER [Vacant] COMMISSIONER [Vacant] EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Raymond C. Hitchcock Miwok/Nisenan NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, California 95691 (916) 373-3710 nahc@nahc.ca.gov NAHC.ca.gov (Za^yuiA^&y^ l/oAiy Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians Elizabeth Kipp, Chairperson P.O. Box 337 Auberry, CA, 93602 Phone: (559) 374 - 0066 Fax: (559) 374-0055 lkipp@bsrnation.com Western Mono Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians Carol Bill, Chairperson P.O. Box 209 Tollhouse, CA, 93667 Phone: (559) 855 - 5043 Fax: (559) 855-4445 coldsprgstribe@netptc.net Mono Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians Jared Aldern, P. O. Box 209 Tollhouse, CA, 93667 Phone: (559) 855 - 5043 Fax: (559) 855-4445 csrepa@netptc.net Mono Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government Robert Ledger, Chairperson 2191 West Pico Ave. Fresno, CA, 93705 Phone: (559) 540 - 6346 ledgerrobert@ymail.com Foothill Yokut Mono Kings River Choinumni Farm Tribe Stan Alec, 3515 East Fedora Avenue Fresno, CA, 93726 Phone: (559) 647 - 3227 Foothill Yokut North Valley Yokuts Tribe Katherine Perez, Chairperson P.O. Box 717 Linden, CA, 95236 Phone: (209) 887 - 3415 canutes@verizon.net Costanoan Northern Valley Yokut North Valley Yokuts Tribe Timothy Perez, P.O. Box 717 Linden, CA, 95236 Phone: (209) 662 - 2788 huskanam@gmail.com Costanoan Northern Valley Yokut Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians Claudia Gonzales, Chairwoman P.O. Box 2226 Oakhurst, CA, 93644 Phone: (559) 412 - 5590 cgonzales@chukchansitribe.net Foothill Yokut Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians Heather Airey, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 2226 Oakhurst, CA, 93644 Phone: (559) 795 - 5986 hairey@chukchansi-nsn.gov Foothill Yokut Table Mountain Rancheria Brenda Lavell, Chairperson P.O. Box 410 Friant, CA, 93626 Phone: (559) 822 - 2587 Fax: (559) 822-2693 rpennell@tmr.org Yokut Table Mountain Rancheria Bob Pennell, Cultural Resource Director P.O. Box 410 Friant, CA, 93626 Phone: (559) 325 - 0351 Fax: (559) 325-0394 rpennell@tmr.org Yokut Traditional Choinumni Tribe David Alvarez, Chairperson 2415 E. Houston Avenue Fresno, CA, 93720 Phone: (559) 217 - 0396 Fax: (559) 292-5057 davealvarez@sbcglobal.net Foothill Yokut 1 of 2 This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Living Spaces Fresno Project, Fresno County. PROJ-2023- 000547 02/07/2023 02:03 PM Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Fresno County 2/7/2023 Tule River Indian Tribe Kerri Vera, Environmental Department P. O. Box 589 Porterville, CA, 93258 Phone: (559) 783 - 8892 Fax: (559) 783-8932 kerri.vera@tulerivertribe-nsn.gov Yokut Tule River Indian Tribe Joey Garfield, Tribal Archaeologist P. O. Box 589 Porterville, CA, 93258 Phone: (559) 783 - 8892 Fax: (559) 783-8932 joey.garfield@tulerivertribe- nsn.gov Yokut Tule River Indian Tribe Neil Peyron, Chairperson P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA, 93258 Phone: (559) 781 - 4271 Fax: (559) 781-4610 neil.peyron@tulerivertribe-nsn.gov Yokut Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson 1179 Rock Haven Ct. Salinas, CA, 93906 Phone: (831) 443 - 9702 kwood8934@aol.com Foothill Yokut Mono 2 of 2 This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Living Spaces Fresno Project, Fresno County. PROJ-2023- 000547 02/07/2023 02:03 PM Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Fresno County 2/7/2023 Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Appendix D Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Project Consistency Checklist Page 1 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 Fresno Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan Update – CEQA Project Consistency Checklist INTRODUCTION The City of Fresno updated its 2014 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan (the Plan) in the year 2021 to conform with existing applicable State climate change policies and regulations. The GHG Plan Update outlines strategies that the City will undertake to achieve its proportional share of GHG emission reductions. The purpose of this GHG Reduction Plan Update Consistency Checklist (Checklist) is to help the City provide a streamlined review process for new development projects that are subject to discretionary review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183.5. This Checklist has been developed as part of the GHG Plan Update implementation and monitoring process and will support the achievement of individual GHG reduction strategies as well as the City’s overall GHG reduction goals. In addition, this Checklist will further the City’s sustainability goals and policies that encourage sustainable development and aim to conserve and reduce the consumption of resources, such as energy and water. Projects that meet the requirements of this Checklist will be deemed to be consistent with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update and will be found to have a less than significant contribution to cumulative GHG (i.e., the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative GHG effects is not cumulatively considerable), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b). Projects that do not meet the requirements in this Checklist will be deemed to be inconsistent with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update and must prepare a project- specific analysis of GHG emissions, including quantification of existing and projected GHG emissions and incorporation of the measures in this Checklist to the extent feasible. This GHG Checklist can be updated to reflect adoption of new GHG reduction strategies or to comply with any changes and updates in the Plan or local, State or federal regulations. Note that not all the measures in the checklist are applicable to all projects. The projects should comply with applicable measures from the checklist. City of Page 2 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 1.Project Information Contact Information Project No./Name: Address: Applicant Name/Co: Contact Information: Project Information 1. What is the Site acreage of the Project? 2. Identify all Applicable Proposed Land uses: a. Residential (Indicate number of single-family units) b. Residential (Indicate number of multi-family units) c. Commercial (total square footage) d. Industrial (total square footage) e. Other (describe) 36 clean air/vanpool stalls, and 8 bicycle stalls. 3. Is the project or a portion of the project located in a transit priority area? (Y/N) 4.Provide a brief description of the project proposed: Living Spaces Fresno Project Robert Holt, Planner III 7354 N. Abby Street, Fresno CA 93720 Living Spaces Planning and Development Department Furniture Retail Store 8.0 104,867 square feet 298 parking stalls, including 30 EV stalls,7 ADA stalls, No Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 was filed on behalf of Living Spaces (Project Applicant). The Project Applicant proposes to construct a 104,867 square foot furniture retail store with 298 parking stalls and associated utility infrastructure on the approximately 8.0-acre project site. (559) 621-8056 City of a«v4is? Page 3 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 2.Determining Land Use Consistency Checklist Item As the first step in determining the consistency with the GHG Reduction Plan for discretionary development projects, this section allows the City to determine the project’s consistency with the land use assumptions used in the GHG Reduction Plan. Yes No 1. Is the proposed project consistent with the approved General Plan, Specific Plan, and Community Plan planned land use and zoning designations? If the answer is Yes, then proceed to the GHG Plan Update Consistency Checklist. If the answer is No, then proceed to question 2. 2. If the proposed project is not consistent with the approved planned land use and zoning designation(s), then provide estimated GHG project emissions under both existing and proposed designation(s) for comparison. Compare the maximum buildout of the existing designation with the maximum buildout of the proposed designation. If the estimated project emissions at maximum buildout of the proposed designation(s) is equivalent to or less than the estimated project emissions at maximum buildout of the existing designation(s), then in accordance with the City’s Significance Determination Thresholds, the project’s GHG impact is less than significant. If there is a proposed development project associated with this plan amendment and or rezone then complete the GHG Plan Update Consistency Checklist and incorporate applicable measures, otherwise there is no further step required. If the estimated project emission at maximum buildout of the proposed designation(s) is greater than the estimated project emissions at maximum buildout of the existing designation(s), then in accordance with the City’s Significance Determination Thresholds, the project’s GHG impact is significant. The project must either show consistency with applicable GP objectives and policies (provide applicable GP objectives and policies here) or provide analysis and measures to incorporate into the project to bring the GHG emissions to a level that is less than or equal to the estimated project emission at maximum buildout of the existing designation(s) unless the decision-maker finds that a measure is infeasible in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. If there is a proposed development project associated with this plan amendment and or rezone then complete the GHG Plan Update Consistency Checklist and incorporate applicable measures, otherwise there is no further step required. X City of %|=i% Page 1 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 3.Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan Update - CEQA Project Consistency Checklist GHG Reduction Plan Update consistency review involves the evaluation of project consistency with the applicable strategies of the GHG Reduction Plan Update. The GHG reduction strategies identified in the GHG Reduction Plan Update relies upon the General Plan and additional local measures as the basis of the development related strategies to reduce GHG emissions. This checklist is developed based on the key local GHG reduction strategies and actions identified in the GHG Reduction Plan Update that are applicable to proposed development projects. Note that not all strategies listed below will apply to all projects. For example, not all projects will meet mixed-use related policies of the General Plan, because not all projects are required to be mixed use. Checklist Item (Check the appropriate box and provide an explanation for your answer) Relevant General Plan Policy Yes No Not Applicable (NA) Explanation 1: Land Use and Transportation Demand Strategies a.Does the project include mixed-use, development? For GHG Reduction Plan consistency, mixed-use development is defined as pedestrian-friendly development that blends two or more residential, commercial, cultural, or institutional, uses, one of which must be residential Policy UF-1-c, LU-3-b, Objective-UF 12, UF-12-a, UF-12-b, UF-12-d, Policy RC-2-a b.Is the project high density? For GHG Reduction Plan consistency, is the project developed at 12 units per acre or higher? LU-5-f c.Is the project infill development, pursuant to the General Plan definition of location within the City limits as of December 31, 2012? LU-2-a, Objective-12, UF-12-a, UF-12-b, UF-12-d d.Does the project implement pedestrian bicycle, and transit linkages with surrounding land uses and neighborhoods? For GHG Reduction Plan consistency, the project must include all sidewalks, paths, trails, and facilities required by the General Plan and Active Transportation Plan, as implemented through the Fresno Municipal Code and project conditions of approval. Policy UF-1-c, UF-12-e, Policy RC-2-a, Objective MT-4,5,6, Policy MT-4-c, Policy MT-6-a, Policy POSS- 7-h Objective MT 8, Policies MT-8-a, MT-8-b e.If the project includes mixed-use or high density development, is it located within ½ mile of a High Quality Transit Area as defined in the City’s CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled? Or, is the project located within 500 feet of an existing or planned transit stop? Policy UF-12-a, UF-12-b, LU-3-b, Objective MT 8, Policies MT-8-a, MT-8-b f.Will the project accommodate a large employer (over 100 employees) and will it implement trip reduction programs such as increasing transit use, carpooling, vanpooling, bicycling, or other measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled pursuant to San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Rule 9410? See the SJVAPCD website for details: https://www.valleyair.org/rules/ currntrules/r9410.pdf Policy MT-8-b, Objective MT-9, Policy MT-10-c, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Rule 9410 X The proposed project does not include mixed-use development and does not include residential uses. X The proposed project does not include residential uses. X The project would not include roadway improvements. However, the proposed project would improve vehicular access to the project site. X The proposed project does not include mixed-use or high density development. X The project would not have over 100 employees. X The project site is within City limits surrounded by commercial and residential uses. City of b«v4is? Page 2 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 Checklist Item (Check the appropriate box and provide an explanation for your answer) Relevant General Plan Policy Yes No Not Applicable (NA) Explanation g.If the project includes modifications to the transportation network, do those improvements meet the requirements of the City of Fresno’s Complete Streets Policy, adopted in October 2019? According to the policy, a complete street is a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users - including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists - appropriate to the function and context of the facility while connecting to a larger transportation network. See City of Fresno website for details: https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wp- content/uploads/sites/17/2019/10/Complete-Streets-091119.pdf MT-1-g, MT-1-h h.Does the project have a less than significant VMT impact, either through satisfying screening criteria or mitigating VMT impacts, pursuant to the City’s adopted VMT thresholds? See City of Fresno website for details: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2021/01/CEQA-Guidelines-for-Vehicle-Miles-Traveled- Final-Adopted-Version.pdf MT-2-b, MT-2-c 2: Electric Vehicle Strategies a.For new multi-family dwelling units with parking, does the project provide EV charging spaces capable of supporting future EV supply equipment (EV capable) at 10% of the parking spaces per 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGREEN, Title 24, Part 11), Section 4.106.4 Policy RC-8-j b.For new commercial buildings, does project provide EV charging spaces capable of supporting EV capable spaces at 4% to 10% of the parking spaces per 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGREEN, Title 24, Part 11), Section 5.106.5.3 Policy RC-8-j 3: Energy Conservation Strategies a.Does the project meet or exceed mandatory state building energy codes? If yes, does the project follow any other GreenPoint ratings such as LEED, Energy Star or others? If yes, indicate level of certification-Silver, gold, platinum if applicable? Policy RC-5-c, Objective RC-8, Policy RC 8-a b.For commercial projects, does the project achieve net zero emissions electricity? Mark NA if project will be permitted before 2030. Mark Yes if voluntary. Add source and capacity in explanation. Additional Recommended GHG Plan Measure, supports Objective RC-8 X The proposed project has a less than significant VMT impact. The project would not include roadway improvements. X X The proposed project would not include multi-family residential uses. X The proposed project would include 30 electric vehicle stalls. X The project would meet the latest CalGreen standards but would not follow other GreenPoint ratings. X The project would be permitted before 2030. City of b«v4is? Page 3 F RESNO G REENHOUSE G AS (GHG) R EDUCTION P LAN U PDATE M ARCH 2021 Checklist Item (Check the appropriate box and provide an explanation for your answer) Relevant General Plan Policy Yes No Not Applicable (NA) Explanation 4: Water Conservation Strategies a.Does the project meet or exceed the mandatory outdoor water use measures of the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGREEN, Title 24, Part 11), Section 4.304? If the project exceeds CalGreen Code mandatory measures provide methods in excess of requirements in the explanation. Examples include outdoor water conservation measures such as; drought tolerant landscaping plants, compliant irrigation systems, xeriscape, replacing turf etc. Provide the conservation measure that the project will include in the explanation. Objective RC-7, Policy RC-7-a, RC-7-h b.Does the project meet or exceed the mandatory indoor water use measures of the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGREEN, Title 24, Part 11), Section 4.303? If the project exceeds CalGreen Code, mandatory measures provide methods in excess of requirements in the explanation. Examples may include water conserving devices and systems such as water leak detection system, hot water pipe insulation, pressure reducing valves, energy efficient appliances such as Energy Star Certified dishwashers, washing machines, dual flush toilets, point of use and/or tankless water heaters. Objective RC-7, Policy RC-7-a, RC-7-e 5: Waste Diversion and Recycling Strategies a.Does the project implement techniques of solid waste segregation, disposal and reduction, such as recycling, composting, waste to energy technology, and/or waste separation, to reduce the volume of solid wastes that must be sent to landfill facilities? Policy PU-9-a, RC-11-a b.During construction will the project recycle construction and demolition waste? Policy RC-11-a c.Does the project provide recycling canisters in public areas where trashcans are also provided? Policy RC-11-a Note: The GHG reduction strategies included in this checklist are based on the GHG reduction strategies identified in the Chapter 5 of the GHG Reduction Plan Update. X The project would meet the latest CalGreen standards. The project would meet the latest CalGreen standards. X X X X The proposed project would be consistent with the CalRecycle Waste Diversion and Recycling Mandate. The proposed project would recycle construction waste. The proposed project would provide recycling canisters. City of b«v4is? Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Appendix E Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Memorandum CARLSBAD CLOVIS IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: March 3, 2023 TO: Lamis Youssef, City of Fresno FROM: Ambarish Mukherjee, P.E., AICP SUBJECT: Fresno Living Spaces Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum LSA has prepared this Trip Generation and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum (Memo) for the proposed Fresno Living Spaces (project) in the City of Fresno (City). The project includes development of 104,867 SF of furniture store and will be located at the southeast corner of East Alluvial Avenue and North Abby Street in the City. The objectives of this Memo are as follows: To estimate the trip generation for the proposed project and determine whether a Levels of Service based Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will be required for the project; and To determine whether the project will have any VMT impact. TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS Trip generation for the project was developed using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) for Land Use 890 – “Furniture Store”. Table A summarizes the project trip generation and shows that the proposed project is anticipated to generate 27 trips in the a.m. peak hour, 54 trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 661 gross daily trips. Retail projects typically draw significant amount trips from the traffic passing the site on an adjacent street. These trips are not “new” trips made for the sole purpose of visiting the site, but are trips made as an intermediate stop en‐route to final destination. Trips from traffic passing the site on an adjacent street are referred to as “pass‐by” trips. Pass‐by trip percentage for the project land use was obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). The pass‐by trips were subtracted from the gross trip generation trips to obtain the net primary trips for the project. As shown in Table A, the project is anticipated to generate 27 net trips in the a.m. peak hour, 25 net trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 311 net daily trips. As recommended in the City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines, dated February 2009, a detailed LOS based Traffic Impact Study (TIS) shall not be required for a project if it generates less than 100 peak hour trips. Since the anticipated number of peak hour trips generated by the proposed project is lower than the 100‐trip threshold established by the City’s Guidelines, a TIS may not be required for this project. LSA 3/3/23 (P:\LSP2201‐Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\Traffic\LivingSpaces_VMTMemo_03‐03‐2023.docx) 2 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS On December 28, 2018, the California Office of Administrative Law cleared the revised California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines for use. Among the changes to the guidelines was removal of vehicle delay and level of service from consideration under CEQA. With the adopted guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). As mentioned above, the project is located within the jurisdiction of City of Fresno. The City has adopted City’s CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds (Guidelines), dated June 2020. Therefore, the City’s guidelines were used to determine the project’s VMT impact. The City’s guidelines include multiple screening criteria for land use projects. Also, an excel based VMT calculator tool is available from Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) that can be used to conduct VMT analysis for small land use projects that are consistent with City’s General Plan (GP). However, given the project type (retail) and size, the project does not meet screening criteria identified in the guidelines and the excel based VMT calculator tool is not applicable for evaluation of retail projects. Therefore, Fresno COG’s Activity‐Based Model (ABM) was used to evaluate the project VMT impact. METHODOLOGY The VMT Guidelines suggest use of total VMT as the metric to evaluate retail land uses The project consists of only retail land use and hence total VMT was used as the VMT metric. Therefore, if there is a net increase in total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario compared to the “no project” scenario, the project constitutes a significant VMT impact. Total VMT for the “no project” scenario was obtained using a separate no project model run. Project Traffic Analysis Zone Update The first step in the preparation of this analysis was to update the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) in the model that includes the project area. Fresno COG ABM includes ability to add or split zones. In order to isolate the project VMT, a new zone was created in the model. The project description included the number of employees for the project (85 employees) which was included in the newly created zone for modeling purposes. No project specific network modifications were required for the model run. Model run was conducted for the existing/base scenario with updated model inputs. The outputs from this updated model run were used to calculate the total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario. Project Impact Determination Based on the City’s VMT Guidelines, the project will have a significant VMT impact if there is a net increase in total regional VMT for the “with project” compared to the “no project” scenario. As shown in Table B, the total regional VMT for the “with project” scenario is less than the total regional VMT for the “no project” scenario. Therefore, as per the City’s VMT Guidelines, the project will not have a significant VMT impact. LSA In Out Total In Out Total Furniture Store 104.867 TSF Trips/Unit1 0.18 0.08 0.26 0.24 0.28 0.52 6.30 Trip Generation 19 8 27252954661 Pass‐by Trips2 0 0 0 (13) (15) (29) (350) Net New Trips 19 8 27121425311 Notes: TSF = Thousand Square Feet 1 2 Rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual , (11th Edition) Land Use 890 ‐ "Furniture Store" , Setting/Location ‐ 'General Urban/Suburban'. Pass‐by rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) for Land Use 890 ‐ 'Furniture Store.' A pass‐by rate of 53% was used for the p.m. peak hour. Since daily pass‐by rates are not available for this land use in the ITE Trip Generation Manual , the p.m. pass‐by rate was used as the daily pass‐by rate. Table A ‐ Project Trip Generation Land Use Units A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Daily P:\LSP2201‐Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\Traffic\Trip Gen.xlsx\Trip Gen (3/3/2023) LSA 3/3/23 (P:\LSP2201‐Living_Spaces\PRODUCTS\Traffic\LivingSpaces_VMTMemo_03‐03‐2023.docx) 3 Table B: Total Regional VMT – With Project and No Project Scenarios With Project No Project Difference Total Roadway VMT (Within Entire Fresno County) 23,240,962 23,241,062 (100) Source: Fresno COG Activity Based Model (ABM) *: VMT for the "no project" scenario was obtained from LSA "no project" model run LSA Exhibit J CITY OF FRESNO NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04472APPLICANT:Brian Saltikov, Senior Project Manager Living Spaces 14501 Artesia Boulevard La Mirada, CA 90638PROJECT LOCATION:7354 North Abby Street; Located on the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues in the City and County of Fresno, California (See Exhibit A - Vicinity Map)APN: 303-201-27Site Latitude: 36° 50'31.2" N & Site Longitude: 119° 47' 13.2" WMount Diablo Base & Meridian, Township 12S, Range 20E, Section 33Filed with theFRESNO COUNTY CLERK 2220 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721FRESNOjgJff^&ERKDEPUTYThe full Initial Study and the Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) are on file in the Planning and Development Department, Fresno City Hall, 3rd Floor, Room 3043, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. ______________________________________EamarcQf>i3<9_________________________________________PROJECT DESCRIPTION:Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Conditional Use Permit Application No. P22- 04472 were filed by Living Spaces and pertains to approximately 8.00 acres of property. The applicant proposes the construction of an approximately 104,867 sq. ft. furniture showroom. Additionally, the project will include on- and off-site improvements including, but not limited to, parking, landscaping, and sidewalks. Conditional Use Permit Application No. P22-04472 allows for the on-sale of beer and wine in conjunction with the furniture showroom business.The City of Fresno has prepared an Initial Study of the above-described project and proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The environmental analysis contained in the Initial Study is tiered from the PEIR State Clearinghouse No. 2019050005 prepared for the Fresno General Plan pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15152 and incorporates the PEIR by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15150.Pursuant to the California Public Resources Code (PRC) §§ 21093 and 21094 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15070 to 15075, 15150, and 15152, this project has been evaluated with respect to each item on the attached Appendix G/lnitial Study Checklist to determine whether this project may cause any additional significant effect on the environment, which was not previously examined in the PEIR. After conducting a review of the adequacy of the PEIR pursuant to PRC § 21157.6(b)(1) and CEQA Guidelines §§ 15151 and 15179(b), the Planning and Development Department, as lead agency, finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the PEIR was certified and that no new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the PEIR was certified as complete, has become available.The completed Appendix G/lnitial Study Checklist, its associated narrative, technical studies and mitigation measures reflect applicable comments of responsible and trustee agencies and research and analyses conducted to examine the interrelationship between the proposed project and the physical environment. The information contained in the project application and its related environmental assessment application, responses to requests for comment, checklist, Initial Study narrative, and any attachments thereto, combine to form a record indicating that an Initial Study has been completed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the CEQA.All new development activity and many non-physical projects contribute directly or indirectly toward cumulative impacts on the physical environment. It has been determined that the incremental effect contributed by this project toward cumulative impacts is not considered substantial or significant in itself and/or that cumulative impacts accruing from this project may be mitigated to less than significant with application of feasible mitigation measures.With mitigation imposed under the PEIR, there is no substantial evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant, direct, indirect or cumulative effects on the environment that are significant and that were not identified and analyzed in the PEIR. The Planning and Development Department, as lead agency, finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the PEIR was certified and that no new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the PEIR was certified as complete has become available.Based upon the evaluation guided by the Appendix G/lnitial Study Checklist, it was determined that there are project specific foreseeable impacts which require project level mitigation measures.The Initial Study has concluded that the proposed project will not result in any adverse effects, which fall within the "Mandatory Findings of Significance" contained in § 15065 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The finding is, therefore, made that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.Public notice has been provided regarding staff’s finding in the manner prescribed by § 15072 of the CEQA Guidelines and by § 21092 of the PRC Code (CEQA provisions).Additional information on the proposed project, including the PEIR, proposed environmental finding of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study may be obtained from the Planning and Development Department, Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, 3rd Floor, Room 3043, Fresno, California 93721 3604. Please contact Rob Holt at (559) 621-8056 or via email at Robert.Holt@fresno.gov for more information.ANY INTERESTED PERSON may comment on the proposed environmental finding. Comments must be in writing and must state (1) the commentor’s name and address; (2) the commentor’s interest in, or relationship to, the project; (3) the environmental determination being commented upon; and (4) the specific reason(s) why the proposed environmental determination should or should not be made. Any comments may be submitted at any time between the publication date of this notice and close of business on May 26, 2023. Please direct comments to Rob Holt, Supervising Planner, City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043, Fresno, California, 93721-3604; or by email to Robert.Holt@fresno.gov.INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: SUBMITTED BY:Rob Holt, Supervising PlannerDATE: May 5, 2023Rob Holt, Supervising PlannerCITY OF FRESNOPLANING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTAttachments:Exhibit A - Vicinity Map ■tawabooDisbExhibit A - Vicinity MapVi Hlrwctt Avfl Pirtia'e »vef MinjwcK Av* E Miiwrft5 ArtW liicmt A\rE RI'U^ A»rr f Dn<n ArtLegendjj Subject Propertylij] @:•>! 63s Exhibit K CITY OF FRESNO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF ACTION GRANTING DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22-04122 & RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Development Department Director, in accordance with Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) Section 15-5009, has approved Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 filed by Living Spaces, pertaining to an 8-acre property located at 7354 North Abby Street, on the east side of North Abby Street, south of East Minarets Avenue. The applicant requests authorization to construct an approximately 104,867 sq. ft. furniture showroom, including on- and off-site improvements including but not limited to parking, landscape, sidewalks, and a trash enclosure. The project also includes a determination that the proposed project is a subsequent project that is not fully within the scope of the PEIR, as provided by the CEQA, as codified in the Public Resources Code Section 21157.1(d) and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15177(c). The property is zoned CR/UGM/cz (Commercial – Regional/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning). The special permit has been granted subject to compliance with the Conditions of Approval, dated July 24, 2023.* *This document is available for review at the Planning and Development Department, located at 2600 Fresno Street, 3rd Floor, Fresno, California 93721. Documents are available for viewing at City Hall during normal business hours (Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.) by appointment only. Please contact the Planner listed below via e-mail or by phone to request electronic copies or schedule an appointment to view documents. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 was granted subject to the following findings: Findings per Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-5206 The Director or Planning Commission may only approve a Development Permit application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this article and with the following: Finding a: The applicable standards and requirements of this Code. a. The proposed structure and use is permitted in the CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district and is subject to the development standards of said zone district pursuant to Chapter 15, Article 12 of the FMC. Given the conditions of approval, the project will comply with all applicable standards and requirements of the Code. Finding b: The General Plan and any operative plan or policies the City has adopted. b. The Fresno General Plan designates the subject site for Commercial – Regional planned land uses and provides objectives to guide in the development of these projects. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Conditional Use Permit No. P22 -04472 meets all policies and objectives of the Fresno General Plan. The following are excerpts of such objectives. Objective: LU-6: Retain and enhance existing commercial areas to strengthen Fresno’s economic base and site new office, retail, and lodging use districts to serve neighborhoods and regional visitors. Implementing Policies: LU-6-a: Foster high quality design, diversity, and a mix of amenities in new development with uses through the consideration of guidelines, consistent with the Urban Form policies of this Plan. LU-6-e: Promote economic growth with regional commercial centers. The proposed development will enhance the existing surrounding commercial areas that will continue to strengthen Fresno’s economic base. In addition, the new commercial building façade complies with the FMC and provides a high-quality design. The subject property is adjacent to an existing shopping center to the south and will connect to the adjacent developed commercial property to the north providing an extension of an existing regional commercial center. Finding c: Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council. c. The proposed structure and site layout is consistent with the site design and façade design development standards provided in the CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district, and the design guidelines adopted in the Fresno General Plan. Finding d: Any approved Tentative Map, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required. d. All special conditions required for the proposed project have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval which shall be met prior to issuance of building permits/o ccupancy. Furthermore, the applicant is required to submit corrected exhibits, inclusive of all conditions of approval which will ensure that all requirements are met. Finding e: Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5 e. The project is located in the Traffic Pattern Zone 7 and the 60 CNEL noise contour. An airport disclosure notice is required as conditioned. The project as proposed complies with the Safety Criteria Matrix of the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The Development Permit will not become effective until 15 days from the date the permit is granted in order to allow time for any interested parties to file an appeal. In the event you wish to appeal the Director's decision, you may do so by filing a written appeal with the Director. The appeal must include the appellant's interest in, or relationship to, the subject property, the decision or action appealed, specific reason(s) why the appellant believes the decision or action should not be upheld. An $963.77 fee applies to an appeal by an applicant (no fee applies if member of the public). The fee is required prior to accepting the appeal, as required by Section 15-5017- A.1 of the FMC and established by the Master Fee Schedule. ANY WRITTEN appeal must be submitted to this office prior to close of business on August 8, 2023. For additional information regarding this project, contact Rob Holt, Planning and Development Department, by telephone at (559) 621-8056 or via e-mail at Robert.Holt@fresno.gov. Si necesita información en Español, comuníquese con Jose Valenzuela al teléfono (559) 621-8070. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, HDFP, Director Dated: July 24, 2023 Assessor’s Parcel No(s). 303-201-27 SEE MAP BELOW Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 · Fresno, CA 93721 · Phone (559) 621-8277 LEGEND Subject Property E MINARETS AVE Exhibit L FRESNO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13812 The Fresno City Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on October 4, 2023, adopted the following resolution relating to Development Permit Application No. P22-04122. WHEREAS, Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 was filed by Living Spaces and pertains to an approximately 8.00-acre property located at 7354 North Abby Street, on the west side of North Abby Street between East Spruce and East Minarets/East Alluvial Avenues; and, WHEREAS, Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 requests authorization to construct an approximately 104,867 square foot furniture showroom ; and, WHEREAS, on July 24, 2023, the Planning & Development Department Director approved Development Permit Application No. P22-04122, as the proposed project satisfied the required findings of approval for Development Permits pursuant to Section 15-5206 of the Fresno Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, on August 8, 2023, approval of Development Permit Application No. P22 -04122 and related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 dated July 24, 2023 were appealed by a member of the public; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Department staff prepared a report and recommended to the Planning Commission recommend that City Council adopt Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and recommended the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Director’s approval of Development Permit Application No. P22 -04122, subject to compliance with the Conditions of Approval, dated July 24, 2023; and, WHEREAS, on October 4, 2023, pursuant to Section 15-5017 of the Fresno Municipal Code, the Fresno City Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing; received testimony from the applicant and the public, and considered the Planning and Development Department’s report recommending denial of the appellant’s appeal and upholding the action of the Planning and Development Department Director to approve Development Permit Application No. P22-04122; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission considered the proposed development permit relative to the staff report and environmental assessment issued for the project; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission invited testimony with respect to the proposed development permit and environmental assessment; and, WHEREAS, two individuals spoke in opposition of the project and two individuals spoke in support of the project; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Fresno City Planning Commission, based upon the testimony and information presented at the hearing and upon review and consideration of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 13812 Conditional Use Permit Application No. P22-04122 October 4, 2023 Page 2 environmental documentation provided, as follows: 1. The Commission finds in accordance with its own independent judgment that with all applicable project specific mitigation measures imposed, there is no substantial evidence in the record that Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 may have additional significant effects on the environment that were not identified in the Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse No. 2019050005 (“PEIR”); and, that all applicable mitigation measures of the PEIR have been applied to the project, together with project specific mitigation measures necessary to assure that the project will not cause significant adverse cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects beyond those identified by the PEIR as provided by CEQA Section 15178(a). Therefore, it has been determined based upon t he evidence in the record that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and that the filing of a mitigated negative declaration is appropriate in accordance with the provisions of CEQA Section 21157.5(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15178(b)(1); and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Fresno City Planning Commission finds that approval of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 is consistent with the Fresno General Plan, Woodward Park Community Plan, and the Fresno Municipal Co de. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Fresno City Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122, dated May 5, 2023 and deny the appeal and uphold the Di rector’s decision to approve Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 authorizing the construction of an approximately 104,867 square foot furniture showroom , subject to the Conditions of Approval dated July 24, 2023. The foregoing Resolution by the Fresno City Planning Commission was made upon a motion by Commissioner Bray, seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Planning Commission Resolution No. 13812 Conditional Use Permit Application No. P22-04122 October 4, 2023 Page 3 VOTING: Ayes - Bray, Diaz, Lyday, Wagner, Vang (chair) Noes - None Not Voting - None Absent - Criner, Hardie (vice chair) DATED: October 4, 2023 __________________________________ Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, Secretary Fresno City Planning Commission Resolution No. 13812 Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Filed by Living Spaces Action: Denial of Appeal and recommend adoption of Environmental Assessment. Project Approved. Exhibit M Public Notice Hearing Radius Map Legend Subject Property Noticing Boundary CITY OF FRESNO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fresno City Council, in accordance with Sections 65090 and 65091 (Planning and Zoning Law) of the Government Code, Section 15202e of the CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the procedures of Article 50, Chapter 15, of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC), will conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal of item below which pertain to approximately 8.00 acres of property located on the east side of North Abby Street, between East Minarets/East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues. 1. Environmental Assessment P22-04122, dated May 5, 2023, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA ) Guidelines. Any interested person may also participate electronically during the public hearing to speak in favor or against the project proposal, by Zoom meeting with instructions provided on the City Council Agenda, and present written testimony at least 24 hours in advance, pursuant to the City Council rules and procedures, or they may be excluded from the administrative record of proceedings. If you challenge the above application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues, you, or someone else, raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Development Services Division of the Planning and Development Department and/or Planning Commission/City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. NOTE: This public hearing notice is being mailed to surrounding property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site pursuant to the requirements of FMC Section 15-5007. All documents related to this project are available for public review at the Planning a nd Development Department at the address listed below or electronic copies may be requested by contacting the Planner at the number listed below. Documents are available for viewing at City Hall during normal business hours (Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.) by appointment only. Please contact the Planner listed below via e-mail or by phone to request electronic copies or schedule an appointment to view documents. For additional information regarding this project, contact Rob Holt, Planning and Development Department, Development Services Division, by telephone at (559) 621-8056, or via e-mail at Robert.Holt@fresno.gov. Si necesita información en Español, comuníquese con Jose Valenzuela e al teléfono (559) 621-8076. Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, HDFP, Director Planning and Development Department Dated: October 20, 2023 Assessor’s Parcel No: 303-201-27 SEE MAP ON REVERSE SIDE Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 · Fresno, CA 93721 · Phone (559) 621-8277 FRESNO CITY COUNCIL Date/Time: Thursday, November 2nd at 10:00 a.m., or thereafter Place: City Hall Council Chamber, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721; or, watch the live broadcast via the Zoom link located on the City Council agenda found here: https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx Rob Holt PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2600 FRESNO STREET, ROOM 3043 FRESNO, CA 93721-3604 THIS IS A LEGAL NOTICE REGARDING 7354 North Abby Street P22-04122 VICINITY MAP Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 · Fresno, CA 93721 · Phone (559) 621-8277 Legend Subject property: E MINARETS/E ALLUVIAL AVE Exhibit N By E-mail October 16, 2023 Jennifer K. Clark, Director Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Philip Siegrist, Planner Planning and Development Department City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Jennifer.Clark@fresno.gov Robert.Holt@fresno.gov Philip.Siegrist@fresno.gov Re: Appeal of the City of Fresno Planning Commission’s Approval of the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122, and the City of Fresno’s Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Living Spaces Retail Project Dear Director Clark, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Siegrist: I am writing on behalf of the Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union No. 294 (“LIUNA”) and its members living and/or working in or around the City of Fresno (“City”). On August 8, 2023, LIUNA appealed the Planning and Development Department Director’s Decision to approve the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 on July 24, 2023, and the City’s approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) (Document No. E202310000130) on July 25, 2023 for the project known as the Living Spaces Retail Project located on the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues (APN: 303-201-27) in the City and County of Fresno, California by applicant Living Spaces (“Project”). On October 4, 2023, the Planning Commission heard both of the appeals and upheld the Development Permit and recommended that the City Council approve the MND. LIUNA now files this further appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision on the Development Permit for the Project and reiterates its pending appeal of the MND prepared for the Project. These appeals are filed pursuant to the City of Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5005, establishing procedures for appealing California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) determinations to the City Council, and Municipal Code section 15-5017, establishing the procedures for appealing Planning Commission decisions by filing a written appeal with the Director. Members of LIUNA live and/or work in the vicinity of the proposed Project. They breathe the air, enjoy observing wildlife, want to ensure maximum energy efficiency, and will suffer other environmental impacts of the Project unless it is properly Living Spaces Retail Project Appeal of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122; Reiteration of Appeal of Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Living Spaces Retail Project October 16, 2023 Page 2 of 2 mitigated. LIUNA is concerned that the MND prepared for the Project fails to comply with CEQA and that the Planning and Development Department and the Planning Commission did not adequately address LIUNA’s May 26, 2023 comments, which are included at Attachment 1 to this letter and incorporated by reference in this appeal, as well as LIUNA's October 3, 2023 supplemental comments, which are included at Attachment 2 to this letter and incorporated by reference in this appeal. Specifically, the MND fails to adequately analyze the potential significant environmental impacts of the Project, including impacts to biological resources, including impacts on burrowing owls and nesting birds, air quality, health risks, and energy impacts. The City adopted the MND and approved a Development Permit Application for the Project despite evidence in the record establishing substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project will have significant environmental impacts. Given the fact that the record contains a fair argument that the Project will have significant environmental impacts, the Planning and Development Department should have prepared an EIR for the Project rather than an MND and refrained from approval of the Development Permit Application until the proper CEQA review was performed. Sincerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU DRURY LLP ATTACHMENT 1 May 26, 2023 Via E-mail Robert Holt, Supervising Planner City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 Robert.Holt@fresno.gov City of Fresno Planning and Development Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043 Fresno, CA 93721 PublicCommentsPlanning@fresno.gov Re: Comment on Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Dear Mr. Holt and City of Fresno Planning and Development Department: I am writing on behalf of Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22-04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the “Applicant”), and prepared for the Project, including all actions related or referring to the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8-acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”). LIUNA is concerned that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND” or “MND”) prepared for the Project is legally inadequate. After reviewing the MND, we conclude that it fails as an informational document, and that there is a fair argument that the Project may have adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, we request that the City of Fresno (the “City”) prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code (“PRC”) section 21000, et seq. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Project is for the construction and operation of an approximately 104,867 square-foot furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking. More specifically, the Project would include an 81,608 square-foot showroom, a 4,682 square-foot stockroom and attached loading zone for delivery vehicles and customer pick up in the northeast corner, as well as other features. The Project would also include 298 parking stalls, including 30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls and 36 clean air/vanpool parking stalls. Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 2 of 12 The Project site is an approximately 8-acre site located in the City of Fresno with commercial and residential uses to the west. Single-family residences are located approximately 65 feet west of the Project site across North Abby Street. The Pinedale Elementary School is about 900 feet to the west of the Project site. The site is primarily vacant, with the exception of two concrete utility structures located on the southwest corner and the central portion of the project site respectively. The City prepared an initial study and mitigated negative declaration for the proposed Project, which found that the Project would have no potentially significant impacts. However, as discussed below, the Project may have significant biological resources, energy, air quality, and health risk impacts requiring that the City prepare an EIR. LEGAL STANDARD As the California Supreme Court has held, “[i]f no EIR has been prepared for a nonexempt project, but substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may result in significant adverse impacts, the proper remedy is to order preparation of an EIR.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310, 319-320 (CBE v. SCAQMD) (citing No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75, 88; Brentwood Assn. for No Drilling, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 491, 504–505).) “Significant environmental effect” is defined very broadly as “a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment.” (Pub. Res. Code (“PRC”) § 21068; see also 14 CCR § 15382.) An effect on the environment need not be “momentous” to meet the CEQA test for significance; it is enough that the impacts are “not trivial.” (No Oil, Inc., 13 Cal.3d at 83.) “The ‘foremost principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.” (Communities for a Better Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109 (CBE v. CRA).) The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1214 (Bakersfield Citizens); Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 927.) The EIR is an “environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached the ecological points of no return.” (Bakersfield Citizens, 124 Cal.App.4th at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a “document of accountability,” intended to “demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action.” (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process “protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) An EIR is required if “there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC § 21080(d); see also Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) In very limited circumstances, an agency may avoid preparing an EIR by issuing a negative declaration, a written statement Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 3 of 12 briefly indicating that a project will have no significant impact thus requiring no EIR (14 CCR § 15371), only if there is not even a “fair argument” that the project will have a significant environmental effect. (PRC §§ 21100, 21064.) Since “[t]he adoption of a negative declaration . . . has a terminal effect on the environmental review process,” by allowing the agency “to dispense with the duty [to prepare an EIR],” negative declarations are allowed only in cases where “the proposed project will not affect the environment at all.” (Citizens of Lake Murray v. San Diego (1989) 129 Cal.App.3d 436, 440.) Where an initial study shows that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, a mitigated negative declaration may be appropriate. However, a mitigated negative declaration is proper only if the project revisions would avoid or mitigate the potentially significant effects identified in the initial study “to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and…there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC §§ 21064.5, 21080(c)(2); Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 331.) In that context, “may” means a reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment. (PRC §§ 21082.2(a), 21100, 21151(a); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927; League for Protection of Oakland’s etc. Historic Res. v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 904–05.) Under the “fair argument” standard, an EIR is required if any substantial evidence in the record indicates that a project may have an adverse environmental effect—even if contrary evidence exists to support the agency’s decision. (14 CCR § 15064(f)(1); Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 931; Stanislaus Audubon Society v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 150-51; Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602.) The “fair argument” standard creates a “low threshold” favoring environmental review through an EIR rather than through issuance of negative declarations or notices of exemption from CEQA. (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928.) The “fair argument” standard is virtually the opposite of the typical deferential standard accorded to agencies. As a leading CEQA treatise explains: This ‘fair argument’ standard is very different from the standard normally followed by public agencies in their decision making. Ordinarily, public agencies weigh the evidence in the record and reach a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. [Citation]. The fair argument standard, by contrast, prevent s the lead agency from weighing competing evidence to determine who has a better argument concerning the likelihood or extent of a potential environmental impact. (Kostka & Zishcke, Practice Under the California Environmental Quality Act, §6.37 (2d ed. Cal. CEB 2021).) The Courts have explained that “it is a question of law, not fact, whether a fair argument exists, and the courts owe no deference to the lead agency’s determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review.” (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928 (emphasis in original).) Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 4 of 12 For over forty years the courts have consistently held that an accurate and stable project description is a bedrock requirement of CEQA—the sine qua non (that without which there is nothing) of an adequate CEQA document: Only through an accurate view of the project may affected outsiders and public decision-makers balance the proposal’s benefit against its environmental cost, consider mitigation measures, assess the advantage of terminating the proposal (i.e., the “no project” alternative) and weigh other alternatives in the balance. An accurate, stable and finite project description is the sine qua non of an informative and legally sufficient EIR. (County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 185 at 192–93.) CEQA therefore requires that an environmental review document provide an adequate description of the project to allow for the public and government agencies to participate in the review process through submitting public comments and making informed decisions. Lastly, CEQA requires that an environmental document include a description of the project’s environmental setting or “baseline.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15063(d)(2).) The CEQA “baseline” is the set of environmental conditions against which to compare a project’s anticipated impacts. (CBE v. SCAQMD, 48 Cal.4th at 321.) CEQA Guidelines section 15125(a) states, in pertinent part, that a lead agency’s environmental review under CEQA: …must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as they exist at the time [environmental analysis] is commenced, from both a local and regional perspective. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a Lead Agency determines whether an impact is significant. (See Save Our Peninsula Committee v. County of Monterey (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 124-25 (“Save Our Peninsula”).) As the court of appeal has explained, “the impacts of the project must be measured against the ‘real conditions on the ground,’” and not against hypothetical permitted levels. (Id. at 121-23.) DISCUSSION I. The Project May Result in Significant Impacts to Biological Resources. A. The IS/MND inadequately characterized the existing environmental setting as it relates to wildlife. The IS/MND’s baseline for biological impacts is inadequate, incomplete, and understates the biological values at the Project site. According to the IS/MND and the Biological Resources Assessment, included as Appendix B to the IS/MND, “a general biological survey of the project Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 5 of 12 site was conducted by an LSA Biologist on January 19, 2023.” (IS/MND, p. 37; IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 3.) In addition, “[a] literature review and records search was conducted on January 18, 2023, to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special- status plant and animal species in the project vicinity.” (IS/MND, p. 36.) The IS/MND reports “no special-status species hav[ing] been identified within the project site or in the vicinity of the site.” (Id., p. 38.) As a result, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he project site does not contain critical habitat that could support candidate, sensitive or special-status species.” (Id.) However, based on the literature review and the observations made during the January 2023 biological survey of the Project site, special-status bird species could be present and/or use the site for nesting, breeding, and/or foraging. The IS/MND reports that during the LSA biologist’s field survey of the Project site, the following species were observed: A total of seven wildlife species were observed on or near the project site during the January 2023 survey, including: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris; nonnative species), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). (Id., p. 37.) Regarding the observation of California ground squirrels on the Project site, the IS/MND states: While no special-status animal species (or signs of such species) were observed on site during the January 2023 survey, California ground squirrel burrows that could be used by burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) were observed in portions of the project site. None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey, although there is some potential for use by this species in the future. Potentially significant direct and/or indirect impacts, including mortality, harassment, or other forms of incidental take, could occur if construction-related ground disturbance occurs in or around an occupied burrow. (Id.) The occurrence of California ground squirrels is also significant because ground squirrels are prey of large raptors such as bald eagle, golden eagle, ferruginous hawk and Swainson’s hawk. Due to the presence of ground squirrels on the Project site, protocol-level surveys should have been performed for burrowing owls and nesting birds and raptors, such as the Swainson’s hawk. Instead, only a single reconnaissance-level survey was conducted on January 19, 2023. This survey was inadequate for several reasons. First, the January 2023 field survey of the Project site does not provide substantial evidence of the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. The lack of evidence of burrowing owls on the Project site was not necessarily because they were not there, but because Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 6 of 12 the survey was not conducted during the breeding season when the owls may be present and did not adhere to the survey protocols for burrowing owls prepared by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”). According to CDFW: Burrowing owls are more detectable during the breeding season with detection probabilities being highest during the nestling stage (Conway et al. 2008). In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from 1 February to 31 August (Haug et al. 1993, Thompsen 1971) with some variances by geographic location and climatic conditions. Several researchers suggest three or more survey visits during daylight hours (Haug and Diduik 1993, CBOC 1997, Conway and Simon 2003) and recommend each visit occur at least three weeks apart during the peak of the breeding season, commonly accepted in California as between 15 April and 15 July (CBOC 1997). Conway and Simon (2003) and Conway et al. (2008) recommended conducting surveys during the day when most burrowing owls in a local area are in the laying and incubation period (so as not to miss early breeding attempts), during the nesting period, and in the late nestling period when most owls are spending time above ground. Non-breeding season (1 September to 31 January) surveys may provide information on burrowing owl occupancy, but do not substitute for breeding season surveys because results are typically inconclusive. Burrowing owls are more difficult to detect during the non-breeding season and their seasonal residency status is difficult to ascertain. (Cal. Dep’t Fish & Wildlife, Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Mar. 7, 2012), p. 6, at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83843 (emphasis added).) However, the biological survey of the Project site took place on January 19, 2023, which is outside of the breeding season for burrowing owls, as identified above by the CDFW. No survey was taken during the burrowing owl breeding season. The single survey that was conducted is also inconsistent with the surveys recommended in the CDFW’s available survey guidelines for burrowing owls. (See, e.g., p. 28.) For example, detection surveys are needed for burrowing owls present on and in the vicinity of the Project site that are consistent with the recommendations of CDFW. An EIR should be prepared along with a report of appropriate detection surveys. Thus, given the paucity of owls present in Fresno and the importance of that county to the breeding success of the species, the Project’s baseline must be informed by protocol-level surveys that can determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls at the site. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on that species of concern. The same baseline problem also afflicts the IS/MND’s discussion of other nesting bird species of concern on or in the vicinity of the Project site, such as the Swainson’s hawk. According to the IS/MND’s Biological Resources Assessment: Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 7 of 12 The project site contains marginal foraging habitat for certain raptors such as the Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), although suitable tree-nesting habitat for this species is absent from the project site. . . . Mature Palm and oak trees in the vicinity and along the perimeter outside of the site in the adjacent parcels could be used by raptors and other tree-nesting species. Overall, the project site and immediate surroundings contain foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species that are protected while nesting under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code. (IS/MND, Appendix B, p. 7.) Because of the absence of detection surveys, the IS/MND only speculates that habitat is marginal and occurrence likelihoods low. Only with an accurate baseline could the IS/MND purport to assess the impacts on nesting raptors and other bird species of concern. As multiple courts have explained: The agency [will] not be allowed to hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data.... CEQA places the burden of environmental investigation on government rather than the public. If the local agency has failed to study an area of possible environmental impact, a fair argument may be based on the limited facts in the record. Deficiencies in the record may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences.” (Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 311; see also Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1378–79; Christward Ministry v. Superior Court (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 180, 197, 228 Cal.Rptr. 868 [fact that initial study checklist was incomplete and marked every impact “no” supported fair argument that project would have significant environmental effects].) Accordingly, a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR for the Project because of the lack of relevant investigation of the site’s biological resources and the possible use of the site by sensitive wildlife species. B. The pre-construction surveys identified in the IS/MND for burrowing owls and nesting birds are not sufficient to address potential impacts to birds that may be present at the Project site. After reviewing the proposed wildlife impact mitigations identified in the IS/MND related to pre-construction surveys for burrowing owl surveys (i.e. Mitigation Measure BIO-1), and nesting birds (i.e. Mitigation Measure BIO-2), we agree with the need for such pre- construction surveys. However, these recommended burrowing owl surveys and pre- construction surveys will come too late either to disclose the Project’s anticipated impacts or to fully mitigate impacts to birds, including burrowing owls and nesting raptors. Instead, detection surveys need to be performed to professional standards and that information used to disclose potential impacts and to inform the pre-construction surveys. Detection surveys are needed, because detection surveys provide the bases for impact assessments and formulation of mitigation measures. They also inform pre-construction surveys, which are otherwise performed Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 8 of 12 in a rushed manner just ahead of construction. By failing to determine the actual baseline of burrowing owls and other nesting-bird species’ reliance on the site for roosting, nesting, and foraging, and instead waiting until five to thirty days before construction to determine what roosts, nests, and birds may suffer impacts from the Project, the IS/MND fails to evaluate and mitigate the Project’s potential significant impacts to special-status bird species. II. The IS/MND’s Analysis of Energy Impacts is Conclusory and Fails to Provide Substantial Evidence that the Project’s Energy Impacts are Less than Significant. Contrary to the IS/MND, the construction and operation of the Project could potentially cause wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 46- 49.) The IS/MND states that “[t]he proposed project would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and gasoline.” (Id., p. 46.) However, the IS/MND concludes that “[t]he proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to energy, and no mitigation is required.” (Id., p. 49.) Regarding the Project’s construction-related gasoline impacts, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts will be less than significant, stating: Petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact during project construction. (Id., p. 46.) Turning to the Project’s operational energy use, the IS/MND concludes that the impacts to natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel use for vehicle and truck trips associated with Project operation will be less than significant because: • [E]lectricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total electricity demand. (Id., p. 47.) • [N]atural gas demand associated with the proposed project would only be less than 0.1 percent of Fresno County’s total natural gas demand. (Id., pp. 47- 48.) • [V]ehicle and truck trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Fresno County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and by less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage. (Id., pp. 47-48.) Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 9 of 12 In addition to the IS/MND’s general estimates regarding the Project’s construction and operational-related natural gas, electricity, and fuel use, above, the IS/MND also bases its less than significant construction and operational energy use conclusion on the following: [The] proposed new development would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). The expected energy consumption during construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent with typical usage rates for commercial uses; however, energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings. (Id., p. 48.) Lastly, concerning whether or not the Project would “[c]onflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency,” the IS/MND concludes: The proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact to regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with California’s energy conservation plans as described in the [California Energy Commission’s] Integrated Energy Policy Reports. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (IS/MND, p. 49.) The standard under CEQA is whether the Project would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Failing to undertake “an investigation into renewable energy options that might be available or appropriate for a project” violates CEQA. (California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 213; see also, League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer (“League to Save Lake Tahoe”) (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 164-168.) Energy conservation under CEQA is defined as the “wise and efficient use of energy.” (CEQA Guidelines, app. F, § I.) The “wise and efficient use of energy” is achieved by “(1) decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, (2) decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil, and (3) increasing reliance on renewable energy resources.” (Id.) Noting compliance with the California Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit 20, §§ 1601–1608 (Title 20)) does not constitute an adequate analysis of energy. (Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 256, 264-65.) Similarly, the court in City of Woodland held unlawful an energy analysis that relied on Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 10 of 12 compliance with California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 24, part 6 (Title 24)), that failed to assess transportation energy impacts, and that failed to address renewable energy impacts. (25 Cal.App.4th at pp. 209-13.) As such, the IS/MND’s reliance on Title 20’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations does not satisfy the requirements for an adequate discussion of the Project’s energy impacts. The IS/MND summarily concludes that the Project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. There is no discussion of the Project’s cost effectiveness in terms of energy requirements. There is no adequate discussion of energy consuming equipment and processes that will be used during the construction or operation of the Project, including, inter alia, the energy necessary for heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; and indoor, outdoor, and perimeter lighting. The Project’s energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for building maintenance was also not identified. The IS/MND attempts to satisfy the analysis of energy impacts by estimating the Project’s percentage of energy use compared to energy and fuel use for the entirety of Fresno County. CEQA prohibits this type of “drop in the bucket” analysis. (See Kings Cnty. Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 718; Friends of Oroville v. City of Oroville (2013) 219 Cal. App. 4th 83, 842.) In addition, the effect of the Project on peak and base period demands for electricity has not been addressed. This is of particular concern given recent events where California’s electric grid was significantly impacted by an unprecedented high energy demand as a result of a prolonged, record-breaking heat wave that affected the entire State of California for multiple days. For example, at the start of September 2022, California experienced extreme heat, with temperatures across the state 10 to 20 degrees hotter than normal, driving up energy demand and straining power generation equipment as people ran their air conditioning. On September 6, 2022, as a result of electricity supplies running low in the face of record heat and demand, the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) issued an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) 3, the highest energy alert, authorizing the grid operator to order rotating power outages to lower demand and stabilize the system if necessary. As grid conditions worsened, energy supplies were determined to be insufficient to cover demand and reserves, and an EEA 3 was declared, meaning controlled power outages were imminent or in process according to each utility’s emergency plan. The EEA 3 was in response to an evening peak electricity demand that was forecasted at more than 52,000 megawatts, which Cal-ISO stated was “a new historic all-time high for the grid, as the state endured the hottest day in this prolonged, record-breaking heat wave.” Here, the IS/MND fails to adequately analyze energy conservation. As such, the IS/MND’s conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In addition, under League to Save Lake Tahoe, the agency has to implement all feasible energy mitigation measures unless it has substantial evidence to show that the proposed measures are infeasible. (Save Lake Tahoe, 75 Cal.App.5th at 166-168; see also, id., pp. 159- 163.) An example of a feasible mitigation measure, which has recently been adopted as a new Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 11 of 12 ordinance in San Francisco, is the requirement that 100% of parking spaces have electric vehicle charging stations. According to the IS/MND, of the 298 parking stalls included in the Project, only “30 electrical vehicle (EV) stalls” would be provided. (IS/MND, p. 3.) Since requiring all parking stalls to be EV stalls is likely feasible, the IS/MND must implement it as an energy efficient mitigation measure, or at minimum, provide substantial evidence that implementing the mitigation measure is unfeasible. As such, the IS/MND’s conclusions are unsupported by the necessary discussions of the Project’s energy impacts under CEQA. In conclusion, because the IS/MND failed to adequately analyze and mitigate the Project’s potentially wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy, an EIR should be prepared to address the Project’s potential significant energy impacts, and to mitigate those impacts accordingly. III. The IS/MND Fails to Adequately Evaluate and Mitigate Health Risks from Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions. One of the primary emissions of concern regarding health effects for land development projects is diesel particulate matter (“DPM”), which can be released during Project construction and operation. DPM consists of fine particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers including a subgroup of ultrafine particles (with a diameter less than 0.1 micrometers). Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gases and cancer-causing substances. Exposure to DPM is a recognized health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who may have other serious health problems. According to the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”), DPM exposure may lead to the following adverse health effects: aggravated asthma; chronic bronchitis; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations; decreased lung function in children; lung cancer; and premature deaths for those with heart or lung disease. An EIR should be prepared to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the Project’s operational and construction-related DPM. The IS/MND incorrectly concluded that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”). (See, IS/MND, p. 32.) Given the proximity of the Project to single-family residences within 65 feet of the Project site and Pinedale Elementary School within 1,000 feet of the Project site, construction and operational HRAs need to be prepared to determine the potential significant health risk impacts to families, students, and teachers from DPM emissions related to the Project. As such, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for two reasons. First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. The IS/MND’s conclusion is also inconsistent with the most recent guidance published by the Office of Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”). (See, “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Comment on IS/MND May 26, 2023 Page 12 of 12 Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.) Second, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the excess health risk impact of the Project to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (“SJVAPCD”) specific numeric threshold of 10 in one million. Without conducting a quantified construction and operational HRA, the IS/MND also fails to evaluate the cumulative lifetime cancer risk to nearby, existing receptors from the Project’s construction and operation together. This is incorrect, and as a result, the IS/MND’s evaluation cannot be relied upon to determine Project significance. OEHHA guidance requires that the excess cancer risk be calculated separately for all sensitive receptor age bins, then summed to evaluate the total cancer risk posed by all Project activities. Therefore, in accordance with the most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted. Lastly, the IS/MND relies on inadequate mitigation (i.e. Mitigation Measure Air-1) to support its conclusion that the Project will result in less-than-significant health risk impacts from construction-related emissions. (See, e.g., IS/MND, pp. 32-33.) Mitigation Measure Air-1 only requires certain controls consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) to be included as specifications for the Project and implemented at the construction site. (Id.) The IS/MND should also require construction equipment used at the Project site to meet Tier 4 Final emissions standards to reduce construction-related emissions as well as the adverse health risk impacts of those emissions on nearby sensitive receptors. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, LIUNA requests that an EIR be prepared for the Project and that it be circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU | DRURY LLP ATTACHMENT 2 October 3, 2023 Via E-mail Peter Vang, Chairperson Brad Hardie, Vice Chair David Criner, Commissioner Haley M Wagner, Commissioner Kathy Bray, Commissioner Monica Diaz, Commissioner Jacqueline Lyday, Commissioner City of Fresno Planning Commission 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 PublicCommentsPlanning@fresno.gov Jennifer K. Clark, Director Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Philip Siegrist, Planner Planning and Development Department City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Jennifer.Clark@fresno.gov Robert.Holt@fresno.gov Philip.Siegrist@fresno.gov Re: Supplemental Comment in Support of LIUNA’s Appeals of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department Director’s Decision to Approve the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122, Including the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Living Spaces Retail Project (October 4, 2023 Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII-A) Dear Chairperson Vang, Vice Chair Hardie, Honorable Members of the City of Fresno Planning Commission, Director Clark, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Siegrist: I am writing on behalf of Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22-04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the “Applicant”), and prepared for the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square-foot Living Spaces furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8-acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”), which is scheduled to be heard on appeal by the City of Fresno (“City”) Planning Commission on October 4, 2023. LIUNA submitted comments on the original Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND” or “MND”) on May 26, 2023. On July 24, 2023, Planning and Development Department Director, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) Section 15-5009, approved the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 filed by Living Spaces. On August 8, 2023, LIUNA timely appealed the Director’s July 24, 2023 approval decisions. Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 2 of 9 As noted in LIUNA’s May 26, 2023 comment letter and July 24, 2023 appeal, LIUNA is concerned that the IS/MND prepared for the Project is legally inadequate. After reviewing the MND, we conclude that it fails as an informational document, and that there is a fair argument that the Project may have adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, we request that the City of Fresno (the “City”) prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code (“PRC”) section 21000, et seq. This supplemental comment on the IS/MND has been prepared with the expert assistance of wildlife biologist Dr. Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D. Mr. Smallwood’s comment and his resume are attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. DISCUSSION I. The MND Fails to Adequately Analyze and Mitigate the Potential Adverse Impacts of the Project on Wildlife. After review of the IS/MND, wildlife biologist Dr. Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D., concludes that the Project may have significant impacts on several special status species. An EIR is required to mitigate these impacts. Dr. Smallwood’s conclusions were informed by his site visits in June 2023. Dr. Smallwood visited the site for 1.75 hours from 18:25 to 20:10 hours on June 5, 2023. He visited again the next day on June 6, 2023 for 3 hours from 05:36 hours to 08:36 hours. During the site visits, Dr. Smallwood “saw and photographed osprey (Photos 3 and 4) and double-crested cormorants (Photo 5), both species of which are on California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Taxa to Watch List.” (Ex. A, pp. 2-3.) He also observed “many American crows, a black- crowned night-heron and a pair of Canada geese (Photos 6-8), California scrub-jays and northern mockingbirds (Photos 9 and 10), mourning doves (Photos 11 and 12), western kingbirds (Photos 13 and 15), Anna’s hummingbirds (Photo 14), California ground squirrels (Photos 16 and 17), and desert cottontails (Photo 18), among other species. Some of the species of birds were breeding on site, including California scrub-jay and killdeer (Photos 19 and 20).” (Id., pp. 4-11 & Table 1.) Dr. Smallwood “detected 21 species of vertebrate wildlife at the site and another 2 species nearby, and altogether [he] detected 3 special-status species of wildlife (Table 1).” (Id., p. 4.) Additionally, based on database reviews and site visits, Dr. Smallwood found that 86 special-status species of wildlife are known to occur near enough to the site to warrant analysis of occurrence potential (Id., p. 15; see also id., pp. 17-20 (Table 2).) Of these 86 species, Dr. Smallwood confirmed 2 on site through his survey, “and another 46 (53%) have been documented within 1.5 miles of the site (‘Very close’), 8 of which were recently reported, and another 13 (15%) within 1.5 and 4 miles (‘Nearby’), and another 19 (22%) within 4 to 30 miles (‘In region’). More than two-thirds (71%) of the species in Table 2 have been reportedly seen within 4 miles of the project site.” (Id.) Therefore, Dr. Smallwood concludes that the project site “supports multiple special-status species of wildlife and carries the potential for supporting many more special-status species of wildlife based on proximity of recorded occurrences.” (Id., p. 15.) Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 3 of 9 A. The wildlife baseline relied upon by the MND is woefully inadequate. Wildlife biologist Dr. Smallwood’s review of the potential impacts to wildlife from the Project concluded that the Project may have significant impacts on several special-status species. An EIR is therefore required to analyze these impacts. Dr. Smallwood reviewed the IS/MND and he Biological Resources Assessment it relies on (“BRA”) and found the following issues related to the wildlife baseline that the MND and BRA relied upon: ● [The BRA] fails to report the time the survey began and how long it lasted. Without knowing the level of survey effort, the reader cannot interpret whether the survey detected the typical species or the typical number of species, or whether it detected fewer or more than the usual number of species. Without this critical information about the survey, the findings carry no comparative value. The reporting of the field survey is deficient. (Ex. A, p. 13.) ● [The BRA] reports having detected 7 species of vertebrate wildlife at the project site. This finding suggests … [that the City’s biologist] spent very little time on the site. [Dr. Smallwood] spent only 4.75 hours at the site, and detected the occurrences of 3 times the number of vertebrate wildlife species…, and…saw two more species nearby. City of Fresno needs a better accounting of how much survey effort was directed to the project site. (Id., p. 14.) ● Reporting in the IS/MND is unsupportable by [the BRA] field survey. For example, the IS/MND (p. 37) states, “None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey...” However, burrowing owls typically leave little to no sign of their presence at burrows that they occupy over winter. That no sign was found has no bearing on the occurrence likelihood of burrowing owls. Furthermore, no protocol-level detection surveys have been completed for burrowing owls at this site. (Ex. A, p. 14.) ● [T]he IS/MND reports “...only limited habitat for tree, shrub and ground- nesting birds exists on the project site...” In reality, the site includes expansive substrate for ground-nesting birds, and is surrounded by hedges of shrubs and trees in which birds nest. Not only is all of this nest substrate amply available, but it was in use by nesting birds while [Dr. Smallwood] surveyed the site from the site’s periphery. I watched as California scrub-jays fed their begging fledglings right on the project site (Photo 19) and as killdeer nested on site (Photo 20). [He] also observed fledgling northern mockingbirds and western Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 4 of 9 kingbirds being fed on the project site by their parents. The IS/MND is inaccurate. (Ex. A, p. 14.) ● Of the 86 special-status species of wildlife that appear in [Dr. Smallwood’s] Table 2, [the BRA] addresses only 3 (4%) of them, determining only one of these 3 to have “suitable habitat” on the site…. [The BRA] refers to an Appendix D, which might have been a more expansive analysis of occurrence likelihoods of special-status species, but Appendix D is missing from the copy of [the BRA] that is circulated with the IS/MND. Of the species that are analyzed in [the BRA], Swainson’s hawk is assigned marginal occurrence potential and burrowing owl is assigned low potential, but both have been reported within only 1.5 miles of the project site. [The BRA] does not provide an adequate analysis of the occurrence likelihoods of special-status species. (Ex. A, p. 15.) In conclusion, the MND’s insufficient baseline fails to adequately evaluate the significance of the impacts to special-status species of wildlife. As a result, Dr. Smallwood’s expert observations are substantial evidence of a fair argument that wildlife impacts may occur as a result of the Project. Thus, the Project requires an EIR to properly mitigate wildlife impacts of the Project. B. The MND fails to address the Project’s potential significant impact on loss of breeding capacity. Neither the IS/MND nor the BRA assess the lost breeding capacity of birds that would result from the Project. (See Ex. A, pp. 16, 21.) In so doing, the IS/MND fails to analyze the impact of habitat loss, or the loss of productive capacity on bird species likely to nest on the ground and in trees within the 8-acre project site. (Id.) While habitat loss results in the immediate numerical decline of birds and other animals, it also results in a permanent loss of productive capacity. (Id., p. 16.) Dr. Smallwood cites a recent study that documented a “29% decline in overall bird abundance across North America over the last 48 years,” a decline which he says was “driven by multiple factors, but principally attributed to habitat loss and habitat fragmentation.” (Id. (citing Rosenberg et al. 2019).) Dr. Smallwood cites two studies that show bird nesting densities that were between 32.8 and 35.8 bird nests per acre, for an average of 34.3 bird nests per acre. (Id. (citing Young (1948) and Yahner (1982), respectively.) Assuming nesting density at the Project site is a fifth of the 34.3 average reported, then 6.8 bird nests per acre multiplied by the Project’s 8 acres of habit, Dr. Smallwood predicts that 55 bird nests produce new birds at the site annually. (Id.) Based on an average of 2.9 fledglings per nest, the Project would prevent the production of 182 new birds per year. (Id., p. 21 (citing Young (1948)).) The potential loss of 182 birds in California annually following construction of this Project easily qualifies as a significant and substantial impact that has not been analyzed. An EIR is required to fully analyze the Project’s impact on lost breeding capacity, and to mitigate that impact. Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 5 of 9 C. The MND fails to address the Project’s potential significant impacts on wildlife movement. The IS/MND fails to address impacts to wildlife movement, and instead looks for impacts to a wildlife corridor. (See Ex. A, pp. 21-22.) Instead, the IS/MND improperly dismisses the Project’s potential to significantly impact wildlife movement by reasoning that: The project site does not possess any characteristics that would indicate a locally significant stopover point for migratory species including raptors or waterfowl. No known wildlife movement corridors occur within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. (IS/MND, p. 5.) The project site does not contain any features that would function as wildlife movement corridors for resident or migratory wildlife species. (Id., p. 39.) However, as Dr. Smallwood points out, “[e]xactly what characteristics would indicate locally significant stopover is unidentified. Nor is it explained what qualifies as a known wildlife movement corridor.” (Ex. A, p. 21.) The IS/MND also speculates, “[a]dditionally, existing chain- link fencing surrounding the project site limits the movement of wildlife species on the site.” (IS/MND, p. 39.) But as Dr. Smallwood notes, “the chain-link fence incompletely surrounds the site and is broken in many places.” (Ex. A, p. 21.) As a result, “wildlife movement appeared to [Dr. Smallwood] to be completely unaffected by the fence.” (Id.) The MND’s conclusions regarding effects on wildlife movement rely on a false CEQA standard. (Id.) As Dr. Smallwood states, “[t]he primary phrase of the CEQA standard goes to wildlife movement regardless of whether the movement is channeled by a corridor.” (Id.; see also CEQA Guidelines, App. G, pp. 333-34 (stating that the CEQA significance threshold is whether, among other things, a project will “[i]nterfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species….”).) Impacts to wildlife movement may occur with or without the presence of a wildlife corridor. (Ex. A, p. 21.) Dr. Smallwood writes: A site such as the proposed project site is critically important for wildlife movement because it composes an increasingly diminishing area of open space within a growing expanse of anthropogenic uses, forcing more species of volant wildlife to use the site for stopover and staging during migration, dispersal, and home range patrol (Warnock 2010, Taylor et al. 2011, Runge et al. 2014). In fact, I observed wildlife using the site as part of their travel routes, including osprey, Canada goose, American crows and black-crowned night-heron. (Ex. A, p. 21.) Hence, the Project “would cut wildlife off from one of the last remaining stopover and staging opportunities in the project area, forcing volant wildlife to travel even farther between remaining stopover sites.” (Id.) Therefore, Dr. Smallwood concludes that “[t]his impact would be significant, and as the project is currently proposed, it would be unmitigated.” (Id.) Because the Project would interfere with wildlife movement in the region, an EIR needs to be prepared to address the Project’s impacts on wildlife movement in the region. Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 6 of 9 Lastly, Dr. Smallwood notes that the BRA: … implemented no methodology in its reconnaissance survey to determine whether or to what degree the project site might be used in support of wildlife movement in the region. There was no reported program of observation of behaviors related to movement. There was no sampling that would inform of wildlife movement at and around the project site. There was no search for sign of wildlife movement. Nothing was done that would provide information in support of the IS/MND’s assertions that the project site is unimportant to wildlife movement in the region. (Ex. A, p. 22.) Given that there is evidence that the Project could have indirect and direct impacts that may significantly affect wildlife movement, the City should prepare an EIR to address such impacts and mitigate those impacts accordingly. Dr. Smallwood recommends, at a minimum, substantial compensatory mitigation is needed in response to the Project’s impacts from interference with wildlife movement, including impacts to birds and bats using the site as stop-over or staging during migration. (Id., p. 27.) D. The MND fails to address the Project’s potential significant impacts on wildlife from additional traffic generated by the Project. Dr. Smallwood identifies the serious impacts that increased traffic has on wildlife. (Ex. A, pp. 22-24.) Analyzing the potential impact on wildlife due to vehicle collisions is especially important because “traffic impacts have taken devastating tolls on wildlife,” across North America. (Id., p. 22 (citing Forman et al. 2003).) In the United States alone, estimates for “avian mortality on roads is 2,200 to 8,405 deaths per 100 km per year, or 89 million to 340 million total per year.” (Id. (citing Loss et al. 2014).) As Dr. Smallwood explains: Vehicle collisions have accounted for the deaths of many thousands of amphibian, reptile, mammal, bird, and arthropod fauna, and the impacts have often been found to be significant at the population level (Forman et al. 2003). (Ex. A, p. 22.) Furthermore, a recent study conducted on traffic-caused wildlife mortality found “1,275 carcasses of 49 species of mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles over 15 months of searches” “along a 2.5 mile stretch of Vasco Road in Contra Costa County, California.”( Id., p. 23 (citing Mendelsohn et al. 2009).) Hence, as Dr. Smallwood points out, an analysis is needed to determine whether increased traffic generated by the Project would result in impacts to local wildlife. (Id.) Based on the IS/MND’s estimate that the Project will result in 667,848 annual VMT, Dr. Smallwood predicts that “project-generated traffic would cause 183 wildlife fatalities per year,” which “would qualify as a substantial and highly significant project impact.” (Ex. A, p. 24.) Therefore, he concludes that “[t]here is at least a fair argument that can be made for the need to prepare an EIR to analyze this impact.” (Id.) Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 7 of 9 Additionally, Dr. Smallwood notes that “mitigation measures to improve wildlife safety along roads are available and are feasible,” and therefore, “need exploration for their suitability with the proposed project.” (Id.) Specifically, Dr. Smallwood suggests compensatory mitigation in the form of “funding research to identify fatality patterns and effective impact reduction measures such as reduced speed limits and wildlife under-crossings or overcrossings of particularly dangerous road segments,” and “donations to wildlife rehabilitation facilities.” (Id., p. 27.) The IS/MND fails to recognize at all this potential significant impact of the Project. Because a fair argument exists that the Project may have a significant impact on wildlife in the vicinity, an EIR must be prepared to assess this impact and identify appropriate mitigation. E. The MND fails to adequately address the Project’s potential cumulative impacts on wildlife. The IS/MND fails to adequately analyze the cumulative impacts to wildlife from the Project by improperly implying that cumulative impacts are in reality only residual impacts as a result of incomplete mitigation from project-level impacts. (Ex. A, p. 24.) For example, the IS/MND states that “[t]he proposed project’s impacts would be individually limited and not cumulatively considerable due to the site-specific nature of the potential impacts.” (IS/MND, p. 118.) However, the IS/MND’s implied standard is not the standard of cumulative effects required under CEQA. (Ex. A, p. 24.) CEQA defines cumulative impacts, and it outlines two general approaches for performing the required cumulative analysis. (See 14 CCR § 15130; PRC § 21083(b)(2).) Here, the IS/MND’s cumulative “analysis” is based on flawed logic. The conclusion that the Project will have no cumulative impact because each individual impact has been reduced to a less-than-significant level relies on the exact argument CEQA’s cumulative impact analysis is meant to protect against. The entire purpose of the cumulative impact analysis is to prevent the situation where mitigation occurs to address project-specific impacts, without looking at the bigger picture. This argument, applied over and over again, has resulted in major environmental damage, and is a major reason why CEQA was enacted. As the Court stated in CBE v. CRA: Cumulative impact analysis is necessary because the full environmental impact of a proposed project cannot be gauged in a vacuum. One of the most important environmental lessons that has been learned is that environmental damage often occurs incrementally from a variety of small sources. These sources appear insignificant when considered individually, but assume threatening dimensions when considered collectively with other sources with which they interact. (CBE v. CRA, 103 Cal.App.4th at 114 (citations omitted).) As such, the MND misrepresented the standard and failed to perform an appropriate analysis. Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 8 of 9 The IS/MND further claims that the cumulative impacts to biological resources would be avoided through implementation of recommended mitigation measures. (IS/MND, p. 118.) Dr. Smallwood explains that “this claim is fallacious because mitigation measures for direct project impacts do not necessarily mitigate the sorts of incremental effects to other similar projects that CEQA is concerned about.” (Ex. A, p. 24.) According to Dr. Smallwood, An example that is highly relevant to the proposed project is the site’s existing place in ongoing habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation is the reduction of connectivity of remaining habitat patches on a landscape, and which can further diminish the productive capacity of wildlife in the region (Smallwood 2015). The project would further fragment habitat in an environmental setting in which the wildlife that persist are persisting on one of the very last margins of open space. The very late stage of habitat fragmentation represented at the project site warrants concern. The project’s furtherance of habitat fragmentation on such a highly fragmented landscape easily qualifies as a significant cumulative impact that has not been analyzed nor mitigated in the IS/MND. (Id.) Thus, an EIR must be prepared to include an adequate, serious analysis of the Project’s cumulative impacts on wildlife. F. The pre-construction surveys identified in the MND are not sufficient to address potential impacts to birds that may be present at the site. Dr. Smallwood has reviewed the proposed wildlife impact mitigation identified in the IS/MND related to pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and roosting bats (i.e. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2). (See Ex. a, pp. 25-26.) Although Dr. Smallwood agrees with the need for pre-construction surveys for birds and bats at the Project site, he notes that pre- construction surveys will come too late either to disclose the Project’s anticipated impacts or to fully mitigate impacts to birds and bats. (Id.) As Dr. Smallwood explains: Preconstruction surveys are not designed to detect the target species with anywhere close to the same likelihood as are protocol-level detection surveys, and so are intended as follow-up surveys to detection surveys, the latter of which are needed to inform the CEQA impacts analysis and to identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project’s significant impacts on this species (CDFW 2012). Furthermore, den excavation and passive relocation of burrowing owl burrows would be inconsistent with the CDFW (2012) mitigation guidelines. In fact, CDFW (2012) warns that excavation and passive relocation can be interpreted as take. (Ex. A, p. 25.) By failing to determine the actual baseline of bird’s and bat’s reliance on the site for roosting, nesting, and foraging and instead waiting within seven days prior to the start of construction to determine what roosts, nests, birds, and bats may suffer impacts from the Project, Living Spaces Retail Project, Planning Commission Agenda Item VIII -A Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 October 3, 2023 Page 9 of 9 the IS/MND fails to evaluate and mitigate the Project’s potential significant impacts to nesting birds and bats. Dr. Smallwood recommends that detection surveys be implemented for the Project before pre-construction surveys are performed. (Id., p. 26.) In addition to detection surveys and preconstruction surveys being performed, an EIR should be prepared detailing how the results of preconstruction surveys will be reported. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the IS/MND for the Project should be withdrawn, an EIR should be prepared, and the draft EIR should be circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA. Thank you for considering these comments. Sincerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU | DRURY LLP EXHIBIT A 1 Shawn Smallwood, PhD 3108 Finch Street Davis, CA 95616 Robert Hold, Supervising Planner County of Fresno 2220 Tulare Street, Suite A, Street Level Fresno, CA 93721 29 September 2023 RE: Living Spaces Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 Dear Mr. Holt, I write to comment on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) prepared for Permit Application No. P22-04122 -- a Living Spaces furniture retail building with 104,867 square-foot floor space on 8 acres at 7354 N Abby St, Fresno (APN: 303-201-27). I also removed the biological resources report (LSA 2023). The IS/MND characterizes the site of the proposed project as “vacant,” but I wish to comment on the wildlife that make use of the site. My comments that follow refute the City’s determination that the project would cause no significant impacts to biological resources. My qualifications for preparing expert comments are the following. I hold a Ph.D. degree in Ecology from University of California at Davis, where I also worked as a post- graduate researcher in the Department of Agronomy and Range Sciences. My research has been on animal density and distribution, habitat selection, wildlife interactions with the anthrosphere, and conservation of rare and endangered species. I authored many papers on these and other topics. I served as Chair of the Conservation Affairs Committee for The Wildlife Society – Western Section. I am a member of The Wildlife Society and Raptor Research Foundation, and I’ve lectured part-time at California State University, Sacramento. I was Associate Editor of wildlife biology’s premier scientific journal, The Journal of Wildlife Management, as well as of Biological Conservation, and I was on the Editorial Board of Environmental Management. I have performed wildlife surveys in California for thirty-seven years. My CV is attached. SITE VISIT I visited the site of the proposed project for 1.75 hours from 18:25 to 20:10 hours on 5 June 2023 and for 3 hours from 05:36 hours to 08:36 hours on 6 June 2023. I performed visual-scan surveys for wildlife with the use of binoculars at two locations around the periphery of the site. The sky was overcast on the 5th and partly cloudy with lightning on the 6th. There were no winds, and temperatures ranged 63° F to 85° F. The site was covered by annual grassland, and bordered on the north and south by hedges of shrubs and ornamental trees (Photos 1 and 2). 2 I saw and photographed osprey (Photos 3 and 4) and double-crested cormorants (Photo 5), both species of which are on California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Taxa to Watch List. Photos 1 and 2. Views of the site of the proposed project 6 June 2023. 3 Photos 3 and 4. Osprey flew over the project site at 06:03 hours (left), and returned 20 minutes later with a fish (right), 6 June 2023. Photo 5. Double- crested cormorants flew over the project site on 6 June 2023. 4 I also saw many American crows, a black-crowned night-heron and a pair of Canada geese (Photos 6-8), California scrub-jays and northern mockingbirds (Photos 9 and 10), mourning doves (Photos 11 and 12), western kingbirds (Photos 13 and 15), Anna’s hummingbirds (Photo 14), California ground squirrels (Photos 16 and 17), and desert cottontails (Photo 18), among other species. Some of the species of birds were breeding on site, including California scrub-jay and killdeer (Photos 19 and 20). I detected 21 species of vertebrate wildlife at the site and another 2 species nearby, and altogether I detected 3 special-status species of wildlife (Table 1). Photo 6. Sixty-six American crows flew over the project site, 5 June 2023. Photos 7 and 8. Black-crowned night-heron (left) and Canada goose (right) flying over the project site, 5-6 June 2023. 5 Photo 9 California scrub-jay on the project site, 6 June 2023. Photo 10. Northern mockingbird wing-flashing on the project site, 5 June 2023. Wing- flashing is performed to startle arthropod prey items into revealing themselves. 6 Photos 11 and 12. Mourning doves forage on the project site, 6 June 2023. 7 Photo 13. Western kingbird hovers as a foraging strategy on the project site, 6 June 2023. 8 Photos 14 and 15. Annas’s hummingbird (left) and western kingbird (right) on the project site, 6 June 2023. Photo 16. California ground squirrel pups under the watchful eye of a parent (standing in grass at left) on the project site, 6 June 2023. 9 Photos 17 and 18. Ground squirrel pup (top) and desert cottontail (bottom) on the project site, 5-6 June 2023. 10 Photo 19. California scrub- jay fledgling (left) begs a parent for food on the project site, 5 June 2023. Photo 20. Killdeer on its nest on the project site, 5 June 2023. 11 Table 1. Species of wildlife I observed during 4.75 hours of survey on 5-6 June 2023. Common name Species name Status1 Notes Canada goose Branta canadensis Pair flew over, low Killdeer Charadrius vociferus On site Great egret Ardea alba Very close to site Great blue heron Ardea herodias Flew over Cattle egret Bubulcus ibis Range expansion Pair flew over, low Black-crowned night heron Nycticorax nycticorax Flew over Double-crested cormorant Nannopterum auritum TWL 3 flew over, low Mourning dove Zenaida macroura Multiple pairs Rock pigeon Columba livia Non-native Eurasian collared-dove Streptopelia decaocto Non-native White-throated swift Aeronautes saxatalis Foraged over site Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna Along hedges Osprey Pandion haliaetus TWL, BOP 3 flyovers, 1 with fish Northern harrier Circus hudsonius BCC, SSC3, BOP Nearby Western kingbird Tyrannus verticalis Pair and fledglings European starling Sturnus vulgaris Non-native House finch Haemorphous mexicanus Pairs California scrub-jay Aphelocoma californica Pairs and fledglings American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 66 flew over in evening Cliff swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Foraging Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos Pairs and fledglings Desert cottontail Sylvilagus audubonii Out in evening California ground squirrel Otospermophilus beecheyi Pups and adults 1 Listed as BCC = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern, SSC3 = California Species of Special Concern priority level 3 (Shuford and Gardali 2008), TWL = Taxa to Watch List (Shuford and Gardali 2008), and BOP = Birds of Prey (California Fish and Game Code 3503.5). A couple of reconnaissance surveys, such as those I completed at the project site, cannot support species’ absence determinations, but they can be useful for confirming presence of species and for learning something about what wildlife are doing there. Such surveys can also be useful for estimating the number of species that were not detected, thereby revealing the degree to which the local wildlife community was sampled. One way to do this is to compare my survey outcomes relative to my survey efforts both at the project site and at a research site where I spent hundreds of hours at many survey stations to quantify the levels of sampling of the wildlife community that I could achieve from more extensive survey effort. By use of an analytical bridge, I applied a model developed from a much larger, more robust data set at a research site to predict the number of wildlife species that would make use of the project site over the longer term. As part of my research, I completed a much larger survey effort across 167 km2 of annual grasslands of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, Alameda County, where from 2015 through 2019 I performed 721 1-hour visual-scan surveys, or 721 hours of surveys, at 46 stations. I used binoculars and 12 otherwise the methods were the same as the methods I used at the project site. At each of the 46 survey stations at my research site, I tallied new species detected with each sequential survey at that station, and then related the cumulative species detected to the hours (number of surveys, as each survey lasted 1 hour) used to accumulate my counts of species detected. I used combined quadratic and simplex methods of estimation in Statistica to estimate least-squares, best-fit nonlinear models of the number of cumulative species detected regressed on hours of survey (number of surveys) at the station: 𝑅̂=1 1 𝑎⁄+𝑎×(𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑟)𝑐 , where 𝑅̂ represented cumulative species richness detected. The models’ coefficients of determination, r2, ranged 0.88 to 1.00, with a mean of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.98); or in other words, the models were excellent fits to the data. I projected the predictions of each model to thousands of hours to find predicted asymptotes of wildlife species richness. The mean model-predicted asymptote of species richness was 57 after 11,857 hours of visual-scan surveys among the 46 stations. I also averaged model predictions of species richness at each incremental increase of number of surveys, i.e., number of hours (Figure 1). On average I detected 16.8 species over the first 4.75 hours of surveys in the Altamont Pass (4.75 hours to match the number of hours I surveyed at the project site), which composed 29.47% of the total predicted species I would detect with a much larger survey effort. Given the example illustrated in Figure 1, the 21 species I detected after my 4.75 hours of survey at the project site likely represented 29.47% of the species to be detected after many more visual-scan surveys over another year or longer. With many more repeat surveys through the year, I would likely detect 21 0.2947⁄=71 species of vertebrate wildlife at the site. Assuming my ratio of special-status to non-special-status species was to hold through the detections of all 71 predicted species, then continued surveys would eventually detect 7 special-status species of vertebrate wildlife. Again, however, my prediction of 71 species of vertebrate wildlife, including 7 special- status species, is derived from a visual-scan survey during the daytime, and would not detect nocturnal birds and mammals. The true number of species composing the wildlife community of the site must be larger. A couple of reconnaissance surveys should serve only as a starting point toward characterization of a site’s wildlife community, but it certainly cannot alone inform of the inventory of species that use the site. Considering the number of wildlife species known and predicted to occur at the site of the proposed project, and considering the number of special-status species known and predicted to occur at the site, a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR to appropriately characterize the wildlife community as part of the existing environmental setting. 13 Figure 2. Mean (95% CI) predicted wildlife species richness, 𝑅̂, as a nonlinear function of hour-long survey increments across 46 visual-scan survey stations across the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, 2015‒2019. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The first step in analysis of potential project impacts to biological resources is to accurately characterize the existing environmental setting, including the biological species that use the site, their relative abundances, how they use the site, key ecological relationships, and known and ongoing threats to those species with special status. A reasonably accurate characterization of the environmental setting can provide the basis for determining whether the site holds habitat value to wildlife, as well as a baseline against which to analyze potential project impacts. For these reasons, characterization of the environmental setting, including the project’s site’s regional setting, is one of CEQA’s essential analytical steps (§15125). Methods to achieve this first step typically include (1) surveys of the site for biological resources, and (2) reviews of literature, databases and local experts for documented occurrences of special-status species. In the case of this project, these steps remain incomplete. Environmental Setting informed by Field Surveys LSA (2023) names a biologist who surveyed for wildlife on the project site on 19 January 2023. However, LSA (2023) fails to report the time the survey began and how long it lasted. Without knowing the level of survey effort, the reader cannot interpret whether the survey detected the typical species or the typical number of species, or whether it detected fewer or more than the usual number of species. Without this critical information about the survey, the findings carry no comparative value. The reporting of the field survey is deficient. 0 20 40 60 80 1000 10 20 30 40 50 Cumulative number of surveys (hours)(95% CI) 14 LSA (2023) reports having detected 7 species of vertebrate wildlife at the project site. This finding suggests to me that LSA spent very little time on the site. I spent only 4.75 hours at the site, and detected the occurrences of 3 times the number of vertebrate wildlife species as seen by LSA (2023), and I saw two more species nearby. City of Fresno needs a better accounting of how much survey effort was directed to the project site. Reporting in the IS/MND is unsupportable by LSA’s (2023) field survey. For example, the IS/MND (p. 37) states, “None of the burrows observed in the project site exhibited features typical of occupied burrowing owl burrows at the time of the survey...” However, burrowing owls typically leave little to no sign of their presence at burrows that they occupy over winter. That no sign was found has no bearing on the occurrence likelihood of burrowing owls. Furthermore, no protocol-level detection surveys have been completed for burrowing owls at this site. In another example, the IS/MND reports “...only limited habitat for tree, shrub and ground-nesting birds exists on the project site...” In reality, the site includes expansive substrate for ground-nesting birds, and is surrounded by hedges of shrubs and trees in which birds nest. Not only is all of this nest substrate amply available, but it was in use by nesting birds while I surveyed the site from the site’s periphery. I watched as California scrub-jays fed their begging fledglings right on the project site (Photo 19) and as killdeer nested on site (Photo 20). I also observed fledgling northern mockingbirds and western kingbirds being fed on the project site by their parents. The IS/MND is inaccurate. Environmental Setting informed by Desktop Review The purpose of literature and database review, and of consulting with local experts, is to inform the reconnaissance-level survey, to augment it, and to help determine which protocol-level detection surveys should be implemented. Analysts need this information to identify which species are known to have occurred at or near the project site, and to identify which other special-status species could conceivably occur at the site due to geographic range overlap and site conditions. This step is important because the reconnaissance-level survey is not going to detect all of the species of wildlife that make use of the site. This step can identity those species yet to be detected at the site but which have been documented to occur nearby or whose available habitat associations are consistent with site conditions. Some special-status species can be ruled out of further analysis, but only if compelling evidence is available in support of such determinations (see below). In this part of the review, the IS/MND is again misleading. On page 38, it reports, “no special-status species have been identified within the project site or in the vicinity of the site.” This reporting is misleading because the City of Fresno has not actually looked for special-status species at the project site. No protocol-level detection surveys have been completed. And species occurrence databases need to be interpreted more carefully. 15 The desktop review is biased by a curtailed list of potentially occurring special -status species, which resulted from a query of occurrence records within the nearest CNDDB quadrangles. LSA (2023) and the IS/MND screen out many special-status species from further consideration in their characterization of the wildlife community as a component of the baseline environmental setting. CNDDB is not designed to support absence determinations or to screen out species from characterization of a site’s wildlife community. As noted by CNDDB, “The CNDDB is a positive sighting database. It does not predict where something may be found. We map occurrences only where we have documentation that the species was found at the site. There are many areas of the state where no surveys have been conducted and therefore there is nothing on the map. That does not mean that there are no special status species present.” LSA (2023) and the IS/MND misuse CNDDB. CNDDB relies entirely on volunteer reporting from biologists who were allowed access to whatever properties they report from. Many properties have never been surveyed by biologists. Many properties have been surveyed, but the survey outcomes never reported to CNDDB. Many properties have been surveyed multiple times, but not all survey outcomes reported to CNDDB. Furthermore, CNDDB is interested only in the findings of special-status species, which means that species more recently assigned special status will have been reported many fewer times to CNDDB than were species assigned special status since the inception of CNDDB. The lack of many CNDDB records for species recently assigned special status had nothing to do with whether the species’ geographic ranges overlapped the project site, but rather the brief time for records to have accumulated since the species were assigned special status. And because negative findings are not reported to CNDDB, CNDDB cannot provide the basis for estimating occurrence likelihoods, either. In my assessment based on database reviews and site visits, 86 special-status species of wildlife are known to occur near enough to the site to warrant analysis of occurrence potential (Table 2). Of these 86 species, I confirmed 2 on site by my survey, and another 46 (53%) have been documented within 1.5 miles of the site (‘Very close’), 8 of which were recently reported, and another 13 (15%) within 1.5 and 4 miles (‘Nearby’), and another 19 (22%) within 4 to 30 miles (‘In region’). More than two-thirds (71%) of the species in Table 2 have been reportedly seen within 4 miles of the project site. The site therefore supports multiple special-status species of wildlife and carries the potential for supporting many more special-status species of wildlife based on proximity of recorded occurrences. Of the 86 special-status species of wildlife that appear in my Table 2, LSA (2023) addresses only 3 (4%) of them, determining only one of these 3 to have “suitable habitat” on the site (the quotes are there because suitable habitat is redundant; there is no such thing as unsuitable habitat). LSA (2023) refers to an Appendix D, which might have been a more expansive analysis of occurrence likelihoods of special-status species, but Appendix D is missing from the copy of LSA (2023) that is circulated with the IS/MND. Of the species that are analyzed in LSA (2023), Swainson’s hawk is assigned marginal occurrence potential and burrowing owl is assigned low potential, but both 16 have been reported within only 1.5 miles of the project site. LSA (2023) does not provide an adequate analysis of the occurrence likelihoods of special-status species. LSA (2023:7) defends its inadequate analysis with the following statement: “The evaluation of special-status animal species occurrence within the project site was based on a habitat suitability analysis. It did not include exhaustive surveys to determine their presence or absence, but did include direct observation of on-site and off-site conditions and a review of the available recorded occurrence data from the area to conclude whether or not a particular species could be expected to occur. Based on this analysis, it is unlikely that the remaining special-status wildlife species listed in Attachment D would occupy or otherwise utilize the habitat present within the project site.” LSA’s defense is flawed. The mere visiting of a site for a brief period and the inappropriate use of species occurrence databases cannot substitute for protocol-level detection surveys, which by the way, are not exhaustive survey efforts. LSA (2023) lacks the basis for making absence determinations or absence insinuations for special-status species of wildlife at the project site. POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS An impacts analysis should consider whether and how the proposed project would affect members of a species, larger demographic units of the species, the whole of a species, and ecological communities. In the following I introduce several types of impacts likely to result from the project, and which need to be analyzed in an EIR. HABITAT LOSS The project would contribute further to habitat fragmentation, which poses serious problems to wildlife in the region. Habitat fragmentation and habitat loss have been recognized as the most likely leading causes of a documented 29% decline in overall bird abundance across North America over the last 48 years (Rosenberg et al. 2019). Habitat loss not only results in the immediate numerical decline of wildlife, but it also results in permanent loss of productive capacity. That the site is productive to birds was made obvious by the breeding behaviors exhibited by birds I saw there. In the case of birds, two methods exist for estimating the loss of productive capacity that would be caused by the project. One method would involve surveys to count the number of bird nests and chicks produced. The alternative method is to infer productive capacity from estimates of total nest density elsewhere. Two study sites in grassland-wetland- woodland complexes had total bird nesting densities of 32.8 and 35.8 nests per acre (Young 1948, Yahner 1982) for an average 34.3 nests per acre, but the project site is in vineyard, orchard and ornamental trees of two homes. Total nesting density at the project site is probably lower than at the cited study sites. Assuming the 8-acre project site supports only a fifth of the total nesting density of the above-referenced study sites, one can predict a loss of 55 bird nests. Based on the species I saw at the site, 55 nests seems plausible to me. 17 Table 2. Occurrence likelihoods of special-status bird species at or near the proposed project site, according to eBird/iNaturalist records (https://eBird.org, https://www.inaturalist.org) and on-site survey findings, where ‘Very close’ indicates within 1.5 miles of the site, “nearby” indicates within 1.5 and 4 miles, and “in region” indicates within 4 and 30 miles, and ‘in range’ means the species’ geographic range overlaps the site. Entries in bold font indicate the species I detected during my surveys. Common name Species name Status1 Occurrence potential (LSA 2023) Database records, Site visits Monarch Danaus plexippus FC Nearby Crotch’s bumble bee Bombus crotchii CCE Nearby California tiger salamander Ambystoma californiense FT, CT, WL Nearby Western spadefoot Spea hammondii SSC In region Western pond turtle Emys marmorata SSC Nearby Cackling goose (Aleutian) Branta hutchinsii leucopareia WL Very close Redhead Aythya americana SSC2 Very close Barrow’s goldeneye Bucephala islandica SSC Very close Western grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis BCC Very close Clark’s grebe Aechmophorus clarkii BCC Very close Black swift Cypseloides niger SSC3, BCC In region Vaux’s swift Chaetura vauxi SSC2, BCC Very close Costa’s hummingbird Calypte costae BCC Nearby Rufous hummingbird Selasphorus rufus BCC Very close Snowy plover Charadrius nivosus BCC In region Whimbrel2 Numenius phaeopus BCC Very close Long-billed curlew Numenius americanus WL Very close Marbled godwit Limosa fedoa BCC In region Red knot (Pacific) Calidris canutus BCC In region Short-billed dowitcher Limnodromus griseus BCC Nearby Willet Tringa semipalmata BCC In region American avocet2 Recurvirostra americana BCC Very close California gull Larus californicus BCC, WL Very close Black tern Chlidonias niger SSC2, BCC In region Common loon Gavia immer SSC Very close 18 Common name Species name Status1 Occurrence potential (LSA 2023) Database records, Site visits Double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus WL No suitable nest habitat On site American white pelican Pelacanus erythrorhynchos SSC1, BCC Very close White-faced ibis Plegadis chihi WL Very close Turkey vulture Cathartes aura BOP Very close Osprey Pandion haliaetus WL, BOP On site White-tailed kite Elanus luecurus CFP, BOP Very close Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos BGEPA, CFP, BOP, WL Very close Northern harrier Circus cyaneus BCC, SSC3, BOP Very close Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus WL, BOP Very close Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii WL, BOP Very close Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus CE, BGEPA, CFP Very close, recent Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus BOP Very close Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni CT, BOP Marginal Very close, recent Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis BOP Very close, recent Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis WL, BOP Very close Rough-legged hawk Buteo lagopus BOP Nearby Barn owl Tyto alba BOP Very close Western screech-owl Megascops kennicotti BOP Nearby Great horned owl Bubo virginianus BOP Very close Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia BCC, SSC2, BOP Low Very close Lewis’s woodpecker Melanerpes lewis BCC Very close Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides nuttallii BCC Very close, recent American kestrel Falco sparverius BOP Very close, recent Merlin Falco columbarius WL, BOP Very close Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus CFP, BOP Very close Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus WL, BOP Very close Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi BCC, SSC2 Very close Willow flycatcher Empidonax trailii CE Very close Vermilion flycatcher Pyrocephalus rubinus SSC2 Very close 19 Common name Species name Status1 Occurrence potential (LSA 2023) Database records, Site visits Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus SSC2 Very close, recent Yellow-billed magpie Pica nuttalli BCC Nearby Oak titmouse Baeolophus inornatus BCC Nearby California horned lark Eremophila alpestris actia WL Suitable Very close Bank swallow Riparia riparia CT In region Purple martin Progne subis SSC2 In region Wrentit Chamaea fasciata BCC In region California thrasher Toxostoma redivivum BCC Very close Cassin’s finch Haemorhous cassinii BCC Nearby Lawrence’s goldfinch Spinus lawrencei BCC Very close Grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum SSC2 In region Bell’s sparrow Amphispiza b. belli WL In region Oregon vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus affinis SSC2, BCC Very close Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens SSC3 Nearby Yellow-headed blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus SSC3 Very close Bullock’s oriole Icterus bullockii BCC Very close, recent Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor CT, BCC, SSC1 Very close Yellow warbler Setophaga petechia SSC2 Very close, recent Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SSC, WBWG:H In region Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii SSC, WBWG:H In region Canyon bat Parastrellus hesperus WBWG:L In region Big brown bat Episticus fuscus WBWG:L In region Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans WBWG:M In range Western red bat Lasiurus blossevillii SSC, WBWG:H In region Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus WBWG:M In region Western small-footed myotis Myotis cililabrum WBWG:M In range Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes WBWG:H In range Yuma myotis Myotis yumanensis WBWG:LM In range 20 Common name Species name Status1 Occurrence potential (LSA 2023) Database records, Site visits California myotis Myotis californicus WBWG:L In region Fresno kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides exilis FE, CE In range Tipton kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides FE, CE In range American badger Taxidea taxus SSC Nearby 1 Listed as FT or FE = federal threatened or endangered, FC = federal candidate for listing, BCC = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern, CT or CE = California threatened or endangered, CCT or CCE = Candidate California threatened or endangered, CFP = California Fully Protected (California Fish and Game Code 3511), SSC = California Species of Special Concern (not threatened with extinction, but rare, very restricted in range, declining throughout range, peripheral portion of species' range, associated with habitat that is declining in extent), SSC1, SSC2 and SSC3 = California Bird Species of Special Concern priorities 1, 2 and 3, respectively (Shuford and Gardali 2008), WL = Taxa to Watch List (Shuford and Gardali 2008), and BOP = Birds of Prey (CFG Code 3503.5), and WBWG = Western Bat Working Group with priority rankings, of low (L), moderate (M), and high (H). 2 Uncertain if BCC based on 2021 Bird of Conservation Concern list. 21 The loss of 55 nest sites of birds would qualify as a potentially significant project impact, but the impact does not end with the immediate loss of nest sites as nest substrate is removed and foraging grounds graded in preparation for impervious surfaces. The reproductive capacity of the site would be lost. The average number of fledglings per nest in Young’s (1948) study was 2.9. Assuming Young’s (1948) study site typifies bird productivity, the project would prevent the production of 160 fledglings per year. Assuming an average bird generation time of 5 years, the lost capacity of both breeders and annual fledgling production can be estimated from an equation in Smallwood (2022): {(nests/year × chicks/nest × number of years) + (2 adults/nest × nests/year) × (number of years ÷ years/generation)} ÷ (number of years) = 182 birds per year denied to California. In the face of a potential project impact of this magnitude, a fair argument can be made for the need to prepare an EIR to appropriately analyze potential project impacts to the productive capacity of birds. WILDLIFE MOVEMENT One of CEQA’s principal concerns regarding potential project impacts is whether a proposed project would interfere with wildlife movement in the region. An analysis is required. But what is reported is a series of unfounded assertions, such as on page 5 of the IS/MND: “The project site does not possess any characteristics that would indicate a locally significant stopover point for migratory species including raptors or waterfowl. No known wildlife movement corridors occur within the project site or in the immediate vicinity.” Exactly what characteristics would indicate locally significant stopover is unidentified. Nor is it explained what qualifies as a known wildlife movement corridor. And on page 39, the IS/MND asserts, “The project site does not contain any features that would function as wildlife movement corridors for resident or migratory wildlife species.” Again, the IS/MND fails to reveal the nature of these features; examples would help. And on page 39, the IS/MND speculates, “Additionally, existing chain-link fencing surrounding the project site limits the movement of wildlife species on the site.” However, the chain-link fence incompletely surrounds the site and is broken in many places; wildlife movement appeared to me to be completely unaffected by the fence. Most of the IS/MND’s assertions regarding potential impacts to wildlife movement were premised on whether the site is located within a wildlife movement corridor or whether it serves as part of a corridor. The IS/MND’s premise for its assertions represents a false CEQA standard, and is therefore inappropriate to the analysis. The primary phrase of the CEQA standard goes to wildlife movement regardless of whether the movement is channeled by a corridor. A site such as the proposed project site is critically important for wildlife movement because it composes an increasingly diminishing area of open space within a growing expanse of anthropogenic uses, forcing more species of volant wildlife to use the site for stopover and staging during migration, dispersal, and home range patrol (Warnock 2010, Taylor et al. 2011, Runge et al. 2014). In fact, I observed wildlife using the site as part of their travel routes, including osprey, Canada goose, American crows and black-crowned night-heron. The project would cut wildlife off from one of the last remaining stopover and staging opportunities in the project area, forcing volant wildlife to travel even farther between remaining stopover sites. This impact would be significant, and as the project is currently proposed, it would be unmitigated. 22 Furthermore, LSA (2023) implemented no methodology in its reconnaissance survey to determine whether or to what degree the project site might be used in support of wildlife movement in the region. There was no reported program of observation of behaviors related to movement. There was no sampling that would inform of wildlife movement at and around the project site. There was no search for sign of wildlife movement. Nothing was done that would provide information in support of the IS/MND’s assertions that the project site is unimportant to wildlife movement in the region. TRAFFIC IMPACTS TO WILDLIFE The IS Form neglects to address one of the project’s most obvious, substantial impacts to wildlife, and that is wildlife mortality and injuries caused by project -generated traffic. Project-generated traffic would endanger wildlife that must, for various reasons, cross roads used by the project’s traffic (Photos 21―24), including along roads far from the project footprint. Vehicle collisions have accounted for the deaths of many thousands of amphibian, reptile, mammal, bird, and arthropod fauna, and the impacts have often been found to be significant at the population level (Forman et al. 2003). Across North America traffic impacts have taken devastating tolls on wildlife (Forman et al. 2003). In Canada, 3,562 birds were estimated killed per 100 km of road per year (Bishop and Brogan 2013), and the US estimate of avian mortality on roads is 2,200 to 8,405 deaths per 100 km per year, or 89 million to 340 million total per year (Loss et al. 2014). Local impacts can be more intense than nationally. Photo 21. A Gambel’s quail dashes across a road on 3 April 2021. Such road crossings are usually successful, but too often prove fatal to the animal. Photo by Noriko Smallwood. Photo 22. Great-tailed grackle walks onto a rural road in Imperial County, 4 February 2022. 23 Photo 23. Mourning dove killed by vehicle on a California road. Photo by Noriko Smallwood, 21 June 2020. Photo 24. Raccoon killed on Road 31 just east of Highway 505 in Solano County. Photo taken on 10 November 2018. The nearest study of traffic-caused wildlife mortality was performed along a 2.5-mile stretch of Vasco Road in Contra Costa County, California. Fatality searches in this study found 1,275 carcasses of 49 species of mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles over 15 months of searches (Mendelsohn et al. 2009). This fatality number needs to be adjusted for the proportion of fatalities that were not found due to scavenger removal and searcher error. This adjustment is typically made by placing carcasses for searchers to find (or not find) during their routine periodic fatality searches. This step was not taken at Vasco Road (Mendelsohn et al. 2009), but it was taken as part of another study next to Vasco Road (Brown et al. 2016). Brown et al.’s (2016) adjustment factors for carcass persistence resembled those of Santos et al. (2011). Also applying searcher detection rates from Brown et al. (2016), the adjusted total number of fatalities was estimated at 12,187 animals killed by traffic on the road. This fatality number over 1.25 years and 2.5 miles of road translates to 3,900 wild animals per mile per year. In terms comparable to the national estimates, the estimates from the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) study would translate to 243,740 animals killed per 100 km of road per year, or 29 times that of Loss et al.’s (2014) upper bound estimate and 68 times the Canadian estimate. An analysis is needed of whether increased traffic generated by the project site would similarly result in local impacts on wildlife. For wildlife vulnerable to front-end collisions and crushing under tires, road mortality can be predicted from the study of Mendelsohn et al. (2009) as a basis, although it would be helpful to have the availability of more studies like that of Mendelsohn et al. (2009) at additional locations. My analysis of the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) data resulted in an estimated 3,900 animals killed per mile along a county road in Contra Costa County. Two percent of the estimated number of fatalities were birds, and the balance was composed of 34% mammals (many mice and pocket mice, but also ground squirrels, desert cottontails, striped skunks, American badgers, raccoons, and others), 52.3% amphibians (large numbers of California tiger salamanders and California red - 24 legged frogs, but also Sierran treefrogs, western toads, arboreal salamanders, slender salamanders and others), and 11.7% reptiles (many western fence lizards, but also skinks, alligator lizards, and snakes of various species). The metric, annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), is useful for predicting wildlife mortality because I was able to quantify miles traveled along the studied reach of Vasco Road during the time period of the Mendelsohn et al. (2009), hence enabling a rate of fatalities per VMT that can be projected to other sites, assuming similar collision fatality rates. Predicting project-generated traffic impacts to wildlife The IS/MND predicts 667,848 annual VMT. During the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) study, 19,500 cars traveled Vasco Road daily, so the vehicle miles that contributed to my estimate of non-volant fatalities was 19,500 cars and trucks × 2.5 miles × 365 days/year × 1.25 years = 22,242,187.5 vehicle miles per 12,187 wildlife fatalities, or 1,825 vehicle miles per fatality. This rate divided into the predicted annual VMT above would predict 366 vertebrate wildlife fatalities per year. Assuming the commercial/residential landscape of the project site supports only half of the number of animals crossing roads as animals cross Vasco Road where the Mendelsohn et al. (2009) study occurred in annual grassland, the project-generated traffic would cause 183 wildlife fatalities per year, but even this number would qualify as a substantial and highly significant project impact. There is at least a fair argument that can be made for the need to prepare an EIR to analyze this impact. Mitigation measures to improve wildlife safety along roads are available and are feasible, and they need exploration for their suitability with the proposed project. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The IS’MND (page 118) claims, “The proposed project’s impacts would be individually limited and not cumulatively considerable due to the site-specific nature of the potential impacts.” What the IS/MND means by “site-specific nature” is unclear, but it does not comport with the definition of cumulative impacts in the CEQA Guidelines. The IS/MND further claims that cumulative impacts to biological resources would be avoided through implementation of recommended mitigation measures. But this claim is fallacious because mitigation measures for direct project impacts do not necessarily mitigate the sorts of incremental effects to other similar projects that CEQA is concerned about. An example that is highly relevant to the proposed project is the site’s existing place in ongoing habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation is the reduction of connectivity of remaining habitat patches on a landscape, and which can further diminish the productive capacity of wildlife in the region (Smallwood 2015). The project would further fragment habitat in an environmental setting in which the wildlife that persist are persisting on one of the very last margins of open space. The very late stage of habitat fragmentation represented at the project site warrants concern. The project’s furtherance of habitat fragmentation on such a highly fragmented landscape easily qualifies as a significant cumulative impact that has not been analyzed nor mitigated in the IS/MND. 25 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure BIO-1: A preconstruction clearance survey shall be required for burrowing owl no more than 30 calendar days prior to initiation of project activities. ... If an active burrowing owl burrow is found within the project site, ... Specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW. Whereas I concur that preconstruction, take-avoidance surveys should be completed, the IS/MND proposes preconstruction surveys where detection surveys have yet to be completed. Preconstruction surveys are not designed to detect the target species with anywhere close to the same likelihood as are protocol-level detection surveys, and so are intended as follow-up surveys to detection surveys, the latter of which are needed to inform the CEQA impacts analysis and to identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project’s significant impacts on this species (CDFW 2012). Furthermore, den excavation and passive relocation of burrowing owl burrows would be inconsistent with the CDFW (2012) mitigation guidelines. In fact, CDFW (2012) warns that excavation and passive relocation can be interpreted as take. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: If vegetation removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to occur within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than 5 days prior to the start of such activities. ... For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. This mitigation language allows a single individual to make a subjective decision, outside the public’s view, to determine the buffer area for any given species. This measure lacks objective criteria, and is unenforceable. The avian breeding season represented in the IS/MND is outdated. It is recognized by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife as 1 February through 15 September. Regardless of the appropriate characterization of the avian breeding season, which in my opinion never truly starts and ends on any particular dates other than the birth and death dates of a bird,1 this measure would not avoid impacts to sensitive avian species. It might prevent the direct destruction of the few nests found by biologists at the immediate time of the preconstruction survey, but it would not prevent the loss of avian breeding capacity and a regional decline of birds. 1 No bird can successfully breed without surviving through the non-breeding seasons, nor without finding sufficient forage and finding or maintaining a reproductive partner during the non -breeding seasons. The activities of birds during the non-breeding season, and the locations of birds – the habitats they occupy – are no less critical to breeding success than the activities and locations of birds during the breeding season. 26 The vast majority of bird nests would not be found by biologists assigned to the survey. I have surveyed for avian nest sites many times, including an intensive survey effort that began in February 2023 and is ongoing. In the ongoing study, I have surveyed my study site 25 times, spending 4 to 5 hours at the study site each time. Even after all this effort, I have located the exact nest sites of only a small fraction of all the nest sites that I know exist based on behavior patterns. I know which pairs of birds are nesting, and I know generally where they are nesting, but not exactly where their nests are located. Of the nest sites I have found, most are cavity nests that are most effectively defended against predators. But most of the nest sites are cup nests or ground nests whose owners cannot allow to be revealed to potential predators. Based on my experience, it is highly likely that the preconstruction survey would fail to find any of the nests of ground-nesting birds that truly occur on the project site, and few of the shrub- and tree-nesting bird nests. The IS/MND’s implication that preconstruction survey would avoid potential impacts to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level is unsubstantiated and unrealistic. Even assuming the biologists managed to find all of the nest sites of breeding birds, which would be highly unlikely, this measure would fail to avoid the takings of 8 acres of avian breeding habitat, thereby denying Californians another 182 birds per year (see earlier comment under Habitat Loss). RECOMMENDED MEASURES Detection Surveys: If the project goes forward, species detection surveys are needed to (1) support negative findings of species when appropriate, (2) inform preconstruction surveys to improve their efficacy, (3) estimate project impacts, and (4) inform compensatory mitigation and other forms of mitigation. Detection survey protocols and guidelines are available from resource agencies for most special-status species. Otherwise, professional standards can be learned from the scientific literature and species’ experts. Survey protocols that need to be implemented include CDFW (2000) for Swainson’s hawks. The guidelines call for multiple surveys throughout the breeding season. Detection Surveys for Bats: Multiple special-status species of bats likely occur on and around the project site. A qualified bat biologist should be tasked with completing protocol-level detection surveys for bats. It needs to be learned whether bats roost in the area and whether bats forage on site. Preconstruction surveys: Completion of reports of the methods and outcomes of preconstruction surveys for burrowing owls and nesting birds should be required. The reports should be made available to the public. Construction Monitoring: If the project goes forward, two or more qualified biologists need to serve as construction monitors. Objective, enforceable criteria need to be specified for implementation of buffers around bird nests or dens of fossorial mammals. The events associated with construction monitoring, such as efforts to avoid impacts and findings of dead and injured wildlife, need to be summarized in a report that is subsequently made available to the public. 27 Habitat Loss: If the project goes forward, compensatory mitigation would be warranted for habitat loss. At least an equal area of land should be protected in perpetuity as close to the project site as possible, but a larger area is likely warranted to mitigate for the impacts to so many special-status species of wildlife as likely occur on the site. And additional compensatory mitigation should be linked to impacts identified in construction monitoring. Road Mortality: Compensatory mitigation is needed for the increased wildlife mortality that would be caused by the project-generated road traffic in the region. I suggest that this mitigation can be directed toward funding research to identify fatality patterns and effective impact reduction measures such as reduced speed limits and wildlife under-crossings or overcrossings of particularly dangerous road segments. Compensatory mitigation can also be provided in the form of donations to wildlife rehabilitation facilities (see below). Fund Wildlife Rehabilitation Facilities: Compensatory mitigation ought also to include funding contributions to wildlife rehabilitation facilities to cover the costs of injured animals that will be delivered to these facilities for care. Many animals would likely be injured by collisions with automobiles. Thank you for your attention, ______________________ Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D. LITERATURE CITED Bishop, C. A. and J. M. Brogan. 2013. Estimates of avian mortality attributed to vehicle collisions in Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 8:2. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5751/ACE-00604-080202. Brown, K., K. S. Smallwood, J. Szewczak, and B. Karas. 2016. Final 2012-2015 Report Avian and Bat Monitoring Project Vasco Winds, LLC. Prepared for NextEra Energy Resources, Livermore, California. CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. Sacramento, California. Forman, T. T., D. Sperling, J. A. Bisonette, A. P. Clevenger, C. D. Cutshall, V. H. Dale, L. Fahrig, R. France, C. R. Goldman, K. Heanue, J. A. Jones, F. J. Swanson, T. Turrentine, and T. C. Winter. 2003. Road Ecology. Island Press, Covello, California. Loss, S. R., T. Will, and P. P. Marra. 2014. Estimation of Bird-Vehicle Collision Mortality on U.S. Roads. Journal of Wildlife Management 78:763-771. 28 LSA, 2023. Biological resources assessment for the proposed living spaces project located in City of Fresno, Fresno County, California. Letter to Brian Saltikov, Real Estate Development, La Mirada, California. Mendelsohn, M., W. Dexter, E. Olson, and S. Weber. 2009. Vasco Road wildlife movement study report. Report to Contra Costa County Public Works Department, Martinez, California. Rosenberg, K. V., A. M. Dokter, P. J. Blancher, J. R. Sauer, A. C. Smith, P. A. Smith, J. C. Stanton, A. Panjabi , L. Helft , M. Parr, and P. P. Marra. 2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science 10.1126/science.aaw1313 (2019). Runge, C. A., T. G. Martin, H. P. Possingham, S. G. Willis, and R. A. Fuller. 2014. Conserving mobile species. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 12(7): 395–402, doi:10.1890/130237. Santos, S. M., F. Carvalho, and A. Mira. 2011. How long do the dead survive on the road? Carcass persistence probability and implications for road-kill monitoring surveys. PLoS ONE 6(9): e25383. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025383 Shuford, W. D., and T. Gardali, [eds.]. 2008. California bird species of special concern: a ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California. Smallwood, K. S. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and corridors. Pages 84-101 in M. L. Morrison and H. A. Mathewson, Eds., Wildlife habitat conservation: concepts, challenges, and solutions. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Smallwood, K. S. 2022. Utility-scale solar impacts to volant wildlife. Journal of Wildlife Management: e22216. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22216 Taylor, P. D., S. A. Mackenzie, B. G. Thurber, A. M. Calvert, A. M. Mills, L. P. McGuire, and C. G. Guglielmo. 2011. Landscape movements of migratory birds and bats reveal an expanded scale of stopover. PlosOne 6(11): e27054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027054. Warnock, N. 2010. Stopping vs. staging: the difference between a hop and a jump. Journal of Avian Biology 41:621-626. Yahner, R. H. 1982. Avian nest densities and nest-site selection in farmstead shelterbelts. The Wilson Bulletin 94:156-175. Young, H. 1948. A comparative study of nesting birds in a five-acre park. The Wilson Bulletin 61:36-47. 1 Kenneth Shawn Smallwood Curriculum Vitae 3108 Finch Street Born May 3, 1963 in Davis, CA 95616 Sacramento, California. Phone (530) 756-4598 Married, father of two. Cell (530) 601-6857 puma@dcn.org Ecologist Expertise • Finding solutions to controversial problems related to wildlife interactions with human industry, infrastructure, and activities; • Wildlife monitoring and field study using GPS, thermal imaging, behavior surveys; • Using systems analysis and experimental design principles to identify meaningful ecological patterns that inform management decisions. Education Ph.D. Ecology, University of California, Davis. September 1990. M.S. Ecology, University of California, Davis. June 1987. B.S. Anthropology, University of California, Davis. June 1985. Corcoran High School, Corcoran, California. June 1981. Experience 762 professional reports, including: 90 peer reviewed publications 24 in non-reviewed proceedings 646 reports, declarations, posters and book reviews 8 in mass media outlets 92 public presentations of research results Editing for scientific journals: Guest Editor, Wildlife Society Bulletin, 2012-2013, of invited papers representing international views on the impacts of wind energy on wildlife and how to mitigate the impacts. Associate Editor, Journal of Wildlife Management, March 2004 to 30 June 2007. Editorial Board Member, Environmental Management, 10/1999 to 8/2004. Associate Editor, Biological Conservation, 9/1994 to 9/1995. Member, Alameda County Scientific Review Committee (SRC), August 2006 to April 2011. The five-member committee investigated causes of bird and bat collisions in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, and recommended mitigation and monitoring measures. The SRC reviewed the science underlying the Alameda County Avian Protection Program, and advised Smallwood CV 2 the County on how to reduce wildlife fatalities. Consulting Ecologist, 2004-2007, California Energy Commission (CEC). Provided consulting services as needed to the CEC on renewable energy impacts, monitoring and research, and produced several reports. Also collaborated with Lawrence-Livermore National Lab on research to understand and reduce wind turbine impacts on wildlife. Consulting Ecologist, 1999-2013, U.S. Navy. Performed endangered species surveys, hazardous waste site monitoring, and habitat restoration for the endangered San Joaquin kangaroo rat, California tiger salamander, California red-legged frog, California clapper rail, western burrowing owl, salt marsh harvest mouse, and other species at Naval Air Station Lemoore; Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach, Detachment Concord; Naval Security Group Activity, Skaggs Island; National Radio Transmitter Facility, Dixon; and, Naval Outlying Landing Field Imperial Beach. Part-time Lecturer, 1998-2005, California State University, Sacramento. Instructed Mammalogy, Behavioral Ecology, and Ornithology Lab, Contemporary Environmental Issues, Natural Resources Conservation. Senior Ecologist, 1999-2005, BioResource Consultants. Designed and implemented research and monitoring studies related to avian fatalities at wind turbines, avian electrocutions on electric distribution poles across California, and avian fatalities at transmission lines. Chairman, Conservation Affairs Committee, The Wildlife Society--Western Section, 1999-2001. Prepared position statements and led efforts directed toward conservation issues, including travel to Washington, D.C. to lobby Congress for more wildlife conservation funding. Systems Ecologist, 1995-2000, Institute for Sustainable Development. Headed ISD’s program on integrated resources management. Developed indicators of ecological integrity for large areas, using remotely sensed data, local community involvement and GIS. Associate, 1997-1998, Department of Agronomy and Range Science, University of California, Davis. Worked with Shu Geng and Mingua Zhang on several studies related to wildlife interactions with agriculture and patterns of fertilizer and pesticide residues in groundwater across a large landscape. Lead Scientist, 1996-1999, National Endangered Species Network. Informed academic scientists and environmental activists about emerging issues regarding the Endangered Species Act and other environmental laws. Testified at public hearings on endangered species issues. Ecologist, 1997-1998, Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology. Conducted field research to determine the impact of past mercury mining on the status of California red-legged frogs in Santa Clara County, California. Senior Systems Ecologist, 1994-1995, EIP Associates, Sacramento, California. Provided consulting services in environmental planning, and quantitative assessment of land units for their conservation and restoration opportunities basedon ecological resource requirements of 29 special-status species. Developed ecological indicators for prioritizing areas within Yolo County Smallwood CV 3 to receive mitigation funds for habitat easements and restoration. Post-Graduate Researcher, 1990-1994, Department of Agronomy and Range Science, U.C. Davis. Under Dr. Shu Geng’s mentorship, studied landscape and management effects on temporal and spatial patterns of abundance among pocket gophers and species of Falconiformes and Carnivora in the Sacramento Valley. Managed and analyzed a data base of energy use in California agriculture. Assisted with landscape (GIS) study of groundwater contamination across Tulare County, California. Work experience in graduate school: Co-taught Conservation Biology with Dr. Christine Schonewald, 1991 & 1993, UC Davis Graduate Group in Ecology; Reader for Dr. Richard Coss’s course on Psychobiology in 1990, UC Davis Department of Psychology; Research Assistant to Dr. Walter E. Howard, 1988-1990, UC Davis Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, testing durable baits for pocket gopher management in forest clearcuts; Research Assistant to Dr. Terrell P. Salmon, 1987-1988, UC Wildlife Extension, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, developing empirical models of mammal and bird invasions in North America, and a rating system for priority research and control of exotic species based on economic, environmental and human health hazards in California. Student Assistant to Dr. E. Lee Fitzhugh, 1985-1987, UC Cooperative Extension, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, developing and implementing statewide mountain lion track count for long-term monitoring. Fulbright Research Fellow, Indonesia, 1988. Tested use of new sampling methods for numerical monitoring of Sumatran tiger and six other species of endemic felids, and evaluated methods used by other researchers. Projects Repowering wind energy projects through careful siting of new wind turbines using map-based collision hazard models to minimize impacts to volant wildlife. Funded by wind companies (principally NextEra Renewable Energy, Inc.), California Energy Commission and East Bay Regional Park District, I have collaborated with a GIS analyst and managed a crew of five field biologists performing golden eagle behavior surveys and nocturnal surveys on bats and owls. The goal is to quantify flight patterns for development of predictive models to more carefully site new wind turbines in repowering projects. Focused behavior surveys began May 2012 and continue. Collision hazard models have been prepared for seven wind projects, three of which were built. Planning for additional repowering projects is underway. Test avian safety of new mixer-ejector wind turbine (MEWT). Designed and implemented a before- after, control-impact experimental design to test the avian safety of a new, shrouded wind turbine developed by Ogin Inc. (formerly known as FloDesign Wind Turbine Corporation). Supported by a $718,000 grant from the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research program and a 20% match share contribution from Ogin, I managed a crew of seven field biologists who performed periodic fatality searches and behavior surveys, carcass detection trials, nocturnal behavior surveys using a thermal camera, and spatial analyses with the collaboration of a GIS analyst. Field work began 1 April 2012 and ended 30 March 2015 without Ogin installing its MEWTs, but we still achieved multiple important scientific advances. Smallwood CV 4 Reduce avian mortality due to wind turbines at Altamont Pass. Studied wildlife impacts caused by 5,400 wind turbines at the world’s most notorious wind resource area. Studied how impacts are perceived by monitoring and how they are affected by terrain, wind patterns, food resources, range management practices, wind turbine operations, seasonal patterns, population cycles, infrastructure management such as electric distribution, animal behavior and social interactions. Reduce avian mortality on electric distribution poles. Directed research toward reducing bird electrocutions on electric distribution poles, 2000-2007. Oversaw 5 founds of fatality searches at 10,000 poles from Orange County to Glenn County, California, and produced two large reports. Cook et al. v. Rockwell International et al., No. 90-K-181 (D. Colorado). Provided expert testimony on the role of burrowing animals in affecting the fate of buried and surface-deposited radioactive and hazardous chemical wastes at the Rocky Flats Plant, Colorado. Provided expert reports based on four site visits and an extensive document review of burrowing animals. Conducted transect surveys for evidence of burrowing animals and other wildlife on and around waste facilities. Discovered substantial intrusion of waste structures by burrowing animals. I testified in federal court in November 2005, and my clients were subsequently awarded a $553,000,000 judgment by a jury. After appeals the award was increased to two billion dollars. Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation. Provided expert testimony on the role of burrowing animals in affecting the fate of buried radioactive wastes at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Washington. Provided three expert reports based on three site visits and extensive document review. Predicted and verified a certain population density of pocket gophers on buried waste structures, as well as incidence of radionuclide contamination in body tissue. Conducted transect surveys for evidence of burrowing animals and other wildlife on and around waste facilities. Discovered substantial intrusion of waste structures by burrowing animals. Expert testimony and declarations on proposed residential and commercial developments, gas-fired power plants, wind, solar and geothermal projects, water transfers and water transfer delivery systems, endangered species recovery plans, Habitat Conservation Plans and Natural Communities Conservation Programs. Testified before multiple government agencies, Tribunals, Boards of Supervisors and City Councils, and participated with press conferences and depositions. Prepared expert witness reports and court declarations, which are summarized under Reports (below). Protocol-level surveys for special-status species. Used California Department of Fish and Wildlife and US Fish and Wildlife Service protocols to search for California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, arroyo southwestern toad, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, western pond turtle, giant kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, Valley elderberry longhorn beetle and other special-status species. Conservation of San Joaquin kangaroo rat. Performed research to identify factors responsible for the decline of this endangered species at Lemoore Naval Air Station, 2000-2013, and implemented habitat enhancements designed to reverse the trend and expand the population. Impact of West Nile Virus on yellow-billed magpies. Funded by Sacramento-Yolo Mosquito and Vector Control District, 2005-2008, compared survey results pre- and post-West Nile Virus epidemic for multiple bird species in the Sacramento Valley, particularly on yellow-billed magpie and American crow due to susceptibility to WNV. Smallwood CV 5 Workshops on HCPs. Assisted Dr. Michael Morrison with organizing and conducting a 2-day workshop on Habitat Conservation Plans, sponsored by Southern California Edison, and another 1- day workshop sponsored by PG&E. These Workshops were attended by academics, attorneys, and consultants with HCP experience. We guest-edited a Proceedings published in Environmental Management. Mapping of biological resources along Highways 101, 46 and 41. Used GPS and GIS to delineate vegetation complexes and locations of special-status species along 26 miles of highway in San Luis Obispo County, 14 miles of highway and roadway in Monterey County, and in a large area north of Fresno, including within reclaimed gravel mining pits. GPS mapping and monitoring at restoration sites and at Caltrans mitigation sites. Monitored the success of elderberry shrubs at one location, the success of willows at another location, and the response of wildlife to the succession of vegetation at both sites. Also used GPS to monitor the response of fossorial animals to yellow star-thistle eradication and natural grassland restoration efforts at Bear Valley in Colusa County and at the decommissioned Mather Air Force Base in Sacramento County. Mercury effects on Red-legged Frog. Assisted Dr. Michael Morrison and US Fish and Wildlife Service in assessing the possible impacts of historical mercury mining on the federally listed California red-legged frog in Santa Clara County. Also measured habitat variables in streams. Opposition to proposed No Surprises rule. Wrote a white paper and summary letter explaining scientific grounds for opposing the incidental take permit (ITP) rules providing ITP applicants and holders with general assurances they will be free of compliance with the Endangered Species Act once they adhere to the terms of a “properly functioning HCP.” Submitted 188 signatures of scientists and environmental professionals concerned about No Surprises rule US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, all US Senators. Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan alternative. Designed narrow channel marsh to increase the likelihood of survival and recovery in the wild of giant garter snake, Swainson’s hawk and Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle. The design included replication and interspersion of treatments for experimental testing of critical habitat elements. I provided a report to Northern Territories, Inc. Assessments of agricultural production system and environmental technology transfer to China. Twice visited China and interviewed scientists, industrialists, agriculturalists, and the Directors of the Chinese Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture to assess the need and possible pathways for environmental clean-up technologies and trade opportunities between the US and China. Yolo County Habitat Conservation Plan. Conducted landscape ecology study of Yolo County to spatially prioritize allocation of mitigation efforts to improve ecosystem functionality within the County from the perspective of 29 special-status species of wildlife and plants. Used a hierarchically structured indicators approach to apply principles of landscape and ecosystem ecology, conservation biology, and local values in rating land units. Derived GIS maps to help guide the conservation area design, and then developed implementation strategies. Smallwood CV 6 Mountain lion track count. Developed and conducted a carnivore monitoring program throughout California since 1985. Species counted include mountain lion, bobcat, black bear, coyote, red and gray fox, raccoon, striped skunk, badger, and black-tailed deer. Vegetation and land use are also monitored. Track survey transect was established on dusty, dirt roads within randomly selected quadrats. Sumatran tiger and other felids. Upon award of Fulbright Research Fellowship, I designed and initiated track counts for seven species of wild cats in Sumatra, including Sumatran tiger, fishing cat, and golden cat. Spent four months on Sumatra and Java in 1988, and learned Bahasa Indonesia, the official Indonesian language. Wildlife in agriculture. Beginning as post-graduate research, I studied pocket gophers and other wildlife in 40 alfalfa fields throughout the Sacramento Valley, and I surveyed for wildlife along a 200 mile road transect since 1989 with a hiatus of 1996-2004. The data are analyzed using GIS and methods from landscape ecology, and the results published and presented orally to farming groups in California and elsewhere. I also conducted the first study of wildlife in cover crops used on vineyards and orchards. Agricultural energy use and Tulare County groundwater study. Developed and analyzed a data base of energy use in California agriculture, and collaborated on a landscape (GIS) study of groundwater contamination across Tulare County, California. Pocket gopher damage in forest clear-cuts. Developed gopher sampling methods and tested various poison baits and baiting regimes in the largest-ever field study of pocket gopher management in forest plantations, involving 68 research plots in 55 clear-cuts among 6 National Forests in northern California. Risk assessment of exotic species in North America. Developed empirical models of mammal and bird species invasions in North America, as well as a rating system for assigning priority research and control to exotic species in California, based on economic, environmental, and human health hazards. Peer Reviewed Publications Smallwood, K. S. 2022. Utility-scale solar impacts to volant wildlife. Journal of Wildlife Management: e22216. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22216 Smallwood, K. S., and N. L. Smallwood. 2021. Breeding Density and Collision Mortality of Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. Diversity 13, 540. https://doi.org/10.3390/d13110540. Smallwood, K. S. 2020. USA wind energy-caused bat fatalities increase with shorter fatality search intervals. Diversity 12(98); https://doi.org/10.3390/d12030098 Smallwood, K. S., D. A. Bell, and S. Standish. 2020. Dogs detect larger wind energy impacts on bats and birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 84:852-864. DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21863. Smallwood, K. S., and D. A. Bell. 2020. Relating bat passage rates to wind turbine fatalities. Smallwood CV 7 Diversity 12(84); doi:10.3390/d12020084. Smallwood, K. S., and D. A. Bell. 2020. Effects of wind turbine curtailment on bird and bat fatalities. Journal of Wildlife Management 84:684-696. DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21844 Kitano, M., M. Ino, K. S. Smallwood, and S. Shiraki. 2020. Seasonal difference in carcass persistence rates at wind farms with snow, Hokkaido, Japan. Ornithological Science 19: 63 – 71. Smallwood, K. S. and M. L. Morrison. 2018. Nest-site selection in a high-density colony of burrowing owls. Journal of Raptor Research 52:454-470. Smallwood, K. S., D. A. Bell, E. L. Walther, E. Leyvas, S. Standish, J. Mount, B. Karas. 2018. Estimating wind turbine fatalities using integrated detection trials. Journal of Wildlife Management 82:1169-1184. Smallwood, K. S. 2017. Long search intervals under-estimate bird and bat fatalities caused by wind turbines. Wildlife Society Bulletin 41:224-230. Smallwood, K. S. 2017. The challenges of addressing wildlife impacts when repowering wind energy projects. Pages 175-187 in Köppel, J., Editor, Wind Energy and Wildlife Impacts: Proceedings from the CWW2015 Conference. Springer. Cham, Switzerland. May, R., Gill, A. B., Köppel, J. Langston, R. H.W., Reichenbach, M., Scheidat, M., Smallwood, S., Voigt, C. C., Hüppop, O., and Portman, M. 2017. Future research directions to reconcile wind turbine–wildlife interactions. Pages 255-276 in Köppel, J., Editor, Wind Energy and Wildlife Impacts: Proceedings from the CWW2015 Conference. Springer. Cham, Switzerland. Smallwood, K. S. 2017. Monitoring birds. M. Perrow, Ed., Wildlife and Wind Farms - Conflicts and Solutions, Volume 2. Pelagic Publishing, Exeter, United Kingdom. www.bit.ly/2v3cR9Q Smallwood, K. S., L. Neher, and D. A. Bell. 2017. Turbine siting for raptors: an example from Repowering of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. M. Perrow, Ed., Wildlife and Wind Farms - Conflicts and Solutions, Volume 2. Pelagic Publishing, Exeter, United Kingdom. www.bit.ly/2v3cR9Q Johnson, D. H., S. R. Loss, K. S. Smallwood, W. P. Erickson. 2016. Avian fatalities at wind energy facilities in North America: A comparison of recent approaches. Human–Wildlife Interactions 10(1):7-18. Sadar, M. J., D. S.-M. Guzman, A. Mete, J. Foley, N. Stephenson, K. H. Rogers, C. Grosset, K. S. Smallwood, J. Shipman, A. Wells, S. D. White, D. A. Bell, and M. G. Hawkins. 2015. Mange Caused by a novel Micnemidocoptes mite in a Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery 29(3):231-237. Smallwood, K. S. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and corridors. Pages 84-101 in M. L. Morrison and H. A. Mathewson, Eds., Wildlife habitat conservation: concepts, challenges, and solutions. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. P22- 04122 PRESENTATION BY: ROB HOLT, SUPERVISING PLANNER CITY COUNCIL HEARING | NOVEMBER 2, 2023ID 23-1506 AERIAL MAP Subject Property CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 PREVIOUS USE CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 CURRENT STATUS CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL •Furniture Showroom – 104,867 square feet •CR (Commercial – Regional) zone district •Large-Format Retail (FMC Sec. 15-6704) •Allowed w/ Approved Development Permit •Complies w/ development standards (setbacks, parking, landscaping) •CD6 Project Review Committee: 7-0 approve CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 APPEAL Noticing Notice of Intent to Adopt MND ◼Posted on 05/05/23 ◼Response Letter and Request for Notice of Action received 05/26/23 Approval and Notice of Action ◼Posted on 07/24/23 ◼One Appeal letter received 08/08/23 (Appeal of Development Permit & CEQA) Concerns regarding Air Quality, Biological Resources and Energy impacts of Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 PLANNING COMMISSION October 4, 2023 Hearing 2 Members Spoke in Opposition, 2 in Support Planning Commission voted to recommend adoption of the Environmental Assessment and deny the appeal and uphold Director’s decision for Development Permit, 5 votes to 0. CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 2023 | ID 23-1506 1 Mary Quinn From:Victoria Yundt < Sent:Wednesday, November 1, 2023 6:03 PM To:Clerk; Jennifer Clark; Robert Holt; Cc:Michael Lozeau; Juliana Lopez Subject:Re: Supplemental Comment in Support of LIUNA’s Appeals of the City of Fresno Planning Commission’s Decision to Uphold the Planning and Development Department Director’s Approval of the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmen... Attachments:2023.11.01 LIUNA Appellant Supplemental Comment re P22-04122 - FINAL & Ex. 1.pdf Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged External Email: Use caution with links and attachments Dear Honorable President Maxwell, Vice‐President Perea, and Councilmembers Karbassi, Arias, Chavez, Bredefeld, and Esparza, Clerk Stermer, Director Clark, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Siegrist: On behalf of Appellant Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), please find comments attached regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22‐04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22‐ 04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the “Applicant”), and prepared for the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square‐foot Living Spaces furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8‐acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”), which is scheduled to be heard on appeal by the City of Fresno City Council on November 2, 2023 (City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23‐1506)). Thank you for your assistance. If you could please confirm receipt of this email and the attached comments, it would be appreciated. Thank you for considering these comments. Sincerely, Victoria ‐‐ Victoria Yundt Lozeau | Drury LLP 1939 Harrison St., Suite 150 Oakland, CA 94612 (she/her) Confidentiality Notice: This message and any attachment(s) may contain privileged or confidential information. Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure is prohibited by law. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments. Thank you. 2 November 1, 2023 Via E-mail Tyler Maxwell, President Annalisa Perea, Vice-President Mike Karbassi, Councilmember Miguel Arias, Councilmember Luis Chavez, Councilmember Garry Bredefeld, Councilmember Nelson Esparza, Councilmember City of Fresno City Council Attn: Todd Stermer, City Clerk 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 clerk@fresno.gov Jennifer K. Clark, Director Rob Holt, Supervising Planner Philip Siegrist, Planner Planning and Development Department City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Re: Supplemental Comment in Support of LIUNA’s Appeals of the City of Fresno Planning Commission’s Decision to Uphold the Planning and Development Department Director’s Approval of the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Related Environmental Assessment No. P22- 04122, Including the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Living Spaces Retail Project; November 2, 2023 City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23- 1506) Dear Honorable President Maxwell, Vice-President Perea, and Councilmembers Karbassi, Arias, Chavez, Bredefeld, and Esparza, Clerk Stermer, Director Clark, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Siegrist: I am writing on behalf of Appellant Laborers International Union of North America, Local Union 294 and its members living in the City of Fresno (“LIUNA”), regarding the Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 and Development Permit Application No. P22- 04122, submitted by Living Spaces (the “Applicant”), and prepared for the proposed development of an approximately 104,867 square-foot Living Spaces furniture retail store and showroom and associated parking, to be located upon an approximately 8-acre site at the east side of North Abby Street between East Alluvial and East Spruce Avenues, in Fresno, California (the “Project”), which is scheduled to be heard on appeal by the City of Fresno (“City”) City Council on November 2, 2023. LIUNA submitted comments on the original Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND” or “MND”) on May 26, 2023. On July 24, 2023, Planning and Development Department Director, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) Section 15-5009, Living Spaces Retail Project, City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23 -1506) Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 November 1, 2023 Page 2 of 6 approved the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 and Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 filed by Living Spaces. On August 8, 2023, LIUNA timely appealed the Director’s July 24, 2023 approval decisions. Prior to the Planning Commission’s October 4, 2023 appeal hearing for the project, LIUNA submitted a supplemental comment letter, which was prepared with the expert assistance of wildlife biologist Dr. Shawn Smallwood, Ph.D. Mr. Smallwood’s comment and his resume are attached as Exhibit A to LIUNA’s October 3, 2023 supplemental comment letter. On October 4, 2023, the Planning Commission denied LIUNA’s appeals. On October 16, 2023, LIUNA timely appealed the Planning Commission’s October 4, 2023 decision of the Planning Director’s approvals of the Development Permit Application and related MND for the Project. As noted in LIUNA’s May 26, 2023 and October 3, 2023 comment letters and July 24, 2023 and October 16, 2023 appeals, LIUNA is concerned that the IS/MND prepared for the Project is legally inadequate. After reviewing the MND, we conclude that it fails as an informational document, and that there is a fair argument that the Project may have adverse environmental impacts, including biological resources, air quality, health risk, greenhouse gas, and energy impacts. Therefore, we request that the City prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code (“PRC”) section 21000, et seq. This supplemental comment on the IS/MND has been prepared with the expert assistance of environmental consulting firm Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”). SWAPE’s comment and resumes are attached as Exhibit 1 hereto and incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. As discussed below, SWAPE reported several issues related to the IS/MND requiring that the City prepare an EIR for the proposed Project. DISCUSSION I. THE IS/MND FAILED TO ADEQUATELY ANALYZE AND MITIGATE THE PROJECT’S AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACTS. A. The IS/MND Relied on Unsubstantiated Input Parameters to Estimate Project Emissions and Thus the Project May Result in Significant Air Quality Impacts Requiring an EIR. In determining that CEQA’s subsequent review provisions apply to the proposed Project, the City relied on emissions calculated with CalEEMod. 2022.1. (Ex. 1, pp. 1-3; IS/MND, p. 29.) This model relies on recommended default values, or on site-specific information related to a number of factors. For example, SWAPE explains that “CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type.” (Ex. 1, p. 1.) When more specific project information is known, the user may change the default values and input project-specific values, but CEQA requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence. The model is used to generate a project’s construction and operational emissions. However, as SWAPE notes, the City’s use of CalEEMod. 2022.1 “poses a problem as the Living Spaces Retail Project, City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23 -1506) Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 November 1, 2023 Page 3 of 6 currently available version of CalEEMod 2022.1 is described as a ‘soft release’ which fails to provide complete output files. Specifically, the ‘User Changes to Default Data’ table no longer provides the quantitative counterparts to the changes to the default values.” (Id. p. 2; IS/MND, Appendix A, p. 66.) As a result, “the output files associated with CalEEMod Version 2022.1 fail to present the exact parameters used to calculate Project emissions.” (Ex. 1, p. 2.) Therefore, SWAPE states: [A]n EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that correctly provides the complete output files for CalEEMod Version 2022.1, or includes an updated air model using an older release of CalEEMod. (Ex. 1, p. 3.) Thus, without preparing either an updated air quality analysis that includes the complete output files for the CalEEMod 2022.1, including the specific numeric changes to the default values, or preparing an updated air model using an older release of CalEEMod, the City fails to adequately analyze the potentially significant air quality and/or GHG impacts from project- generated emissions. In addition, SWAPE also reviewed the Project’s CalEEMod output files provided in the “Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report” model included at Appendix A to the IS/MND, and found that several model inputs used to generate a project’s construction emissions were not consistent with information disclosed in the IS/MND. (Ex. 1 , p. 2.) As a result, SWAPE concludes that the Project’s construction emissions are underestimated. (Id.) An EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that adequately evaluates the impacts that construction of the Project will have on local and regional air quality. Specifically, SWAPE found that several values used in the IS/MND and “Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report” model’s air quality analysis were either inconsistent with information provided in the IS/MND or otherwise unjustified (Ex. 1, pp. 3-4), including: “Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths.” (Id. (emphasis added).) Because of these errors in the IS/MND, the Project’s construction emissions were underestimated and cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project’s air quality impacts. Thus, an EIR is needed to adequately address the air quality impacts of the proposed Project, and to mitigate those impacts accordingly. B. There is Substantial Evidence of a Fair Argument that the Project May Have Significant Health Impacts as a Result of Diesel Particulate Emissions. An EIR is required to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the Project’s operational and construction-related diesel particulate matter (“DPM”) emissions as a result of the Project. SWAPE’s analysis of health risks related to the Project concluded that the IS/MND failed to adequately analyze the health impacts related to the Project’s operational and construction DPM emissions, and provides substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project will have significant health impacts as a result of such emissions. (See Ex. 1, pp. 4-11.) Living Spaces Retail Project, City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23 -1506) Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 November 1, 2023 Page 4 of 6 1. The IS/MND fails to adequately evaluate health risks from DPM emissions. An EIR should be prepared to evaluate the significant health impacts to individuals and workers from the Project’s operational and construction-related DPM emissions. According to SWAPE, the IS/MND incorrectly concluded that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”). (Ex. 1, pp. 4-6 (citing IS/MND, p. 32).) However, the IS/MND fails to mention or evaluate the toxic air contaminant (“TAC”) emissions associated with Project construction or operation whatsoever. As such, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for several reasons. First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the IS/MND fails to quantitatively evaluate construction and operational-related TACs, or make a reasonable effort to connect emissions to health impacts posed to nearby existing sensitive receptors from the Project. (Ex. 1, p. 5.) SWAPE identifies potential emissions from both the exhaust stacks of construction equipment and daily vehicle trips. (Id. (citing IS/MND, pp. 4, 31).) As such, the IS/MND fails to meet the CEQA requirement that projects correlate increases in project- generated emissions to adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions. Second, the IS/MND’s conclusion is also inconsistent with the most recent guidance published by the Office of Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”), the organization responsible for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, as well as local air district guidelines.1 (Ex. 1, pp. 5-6.) OEHHA recommends that projects lasting at least 2 months be evaluated for cancer risks to nearby sensitive receptors, a time period which this Project easily exceeds. (Id., p. 5.) The OEHHA document also recommends that if a project is expected to last over 6 months, the exposure should be evaluated throughout the project using a 30-year exposure duration to estimate individual cancer risks. (Id., p. 6.) Based on its extensive experience, SWAPE reasonably assumes that the Project will last at least 30 years, and therefore recommends that health risk impacts from the Project be evaluated. (Id.) An EIR is therefore required to analyze these impacts. (Id.) Third, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the excess health risk impact of the Project to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) specific numeric threshold of 20 in one million. (Ex. 1, p. 6.) Without conducting a quantified construction and operational HRA, the IS/MND also fails to evaluate the cumulative lifetime cancer risk to nearby, existing receptors from the Project’s construction and operation together. This is incorrect, and as a result, the IS/MND’s evaluation cannot be relied upon to determine Project significance. OEHHA guidance requires that the excess cancer risk be calculated separately for all sensitive receptor age bins, then summed to evaluate the total cancer risk posed by all Project activities. Therefore, in accordance with the most relevant guidance, an assessment of the health 1 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. Living Spaces Retail Project, City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23 -1506) Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 November 1, 2023 Page 5 of 6 risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted and compared to the SJVAPCD threshold of 20 in one million. Thus, to more accurately determine the health risks associated with the Project’s operational and construction-related DPM emissions, an EIR should be prepared that includes updated health risk calculations using correct guidance. 2. There is substantial evidence that the Project may have a significant health risk impact. Correcting the above errors, SWAPE prepared a screening-level HRA to evaluate potential impacts from the construction and operation of the Project. (Ex. 1, pp. 6-11.) SWAPE prepared a screening-level HRA to evaluate potential health risk impacts posed to residential sensitive receptors as a result of the Project’s construction and operational TAC emissions. SWAPE used AERSCREEN, the leading screening-level air quality dispersion model. SWAPE applied a sensitive receptor distance of 125 meters and analyzed impacts to individuals at different stages of life based on OEHHA and SJVAPCD guidance utilizing age sensitivity factors. While utilizing the recommended age sensitivity factors, SWAPE found that the excess cancer risks at a sensitive receptor located approximately 125 meters away over the course of Project construction and operation is approximately 21.1 in one million for infants. (Id., p. 10.) SWAPE also concluded that the total excess lifetime cancer risk over the course of project construction and operation is approximately 32.8 in one million. (Id.) Therefore, the cancer risk for infants and lifetime residents exceeds the SJVAPCD’s threshold of 20 in one million, thus resulting in a potentially significant impact not previously addressed or identified by the IS/MND. Hence, an EIR is required for the Project. CEQA requires an agency to include an analysis of health risks that connects the Project’s air emissions with the health risk posed by those emissions. SWAPE’s screening-level HRA demonstrates that the Project’s construction and operation may have a significant health risk impact, when correct exposure assumptions and up-to-date, applicable guidance are used. Because SWAPE’s screening-level HRA indicates a potentially significant impact, the City must prepare an EIR. This EIR should also include a construction and operational HRA which makes a reasonable effort to connect the Project’s air quality emissions and the potential health risks posed to nearby receptors. Thus, as SWAPE recommends, “an EIR analysis should be prepared to include a refined health risk analysis which adequately and accurately evaluates health risk impacts associated with both Project construction and operation.” (Id., p. 11.) C. The IS/MND Failed to Adequately Analyze Greenhouse Gas Impacts and Thus the Project May Result in Significant Greenhouse Gas Emissions Requiring an EIR. Despite the Project’s large size and numerous additional vehicle trips per day, the MND concludes that the Project will not generate greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions with any significant environmental impacts. The primary rationale cited by the MND is the Project’s Living Spaces Retail Project, City Council Agenda Item 2 (ID No. 23 -1506) Appeals of Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 & Related Environmental Assessment No. P22-04122 November 1, 2023 Page 6 of 6 consistency with a checklist developed to implement the City of Fresno’s GHG Reduction Plan. However, the few checklist items relevant to the Project fail to address the Project’s vehicle emissions – one of the GHG sources from the Project. The MND’s effort to utilize the checklist for this Project fails to disclose or meaningfully address the Project’s GHG impacts. Although the checklist items identified in Appendix D would be applicable to certain aspects of the Project, none of them address the vehicle operations proposed by the Project. “If there is substantial evidence that the effects of a particular project may be cumulatively considerable notwithstanding the project's compliance with the specified requirements in the plan for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, an EIR must be prepared for the project.” (14 CCR § 15183.5(b)(2).) Because the checklist does not include a measure that would address the GHG emissions from the 311 new daily vehicle trips as a result of the Project, there is substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project’s may have a significant GHG impact. (See 14 Cal. Admin. Code § 15064.4(a) (“A lead agency shall make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project”).) Additionally, as SWAPE points out, the IS/MND includes reduction measures from the GHG Reduction Plan that are intended to mitigate GHG emissions but are not formally included as mitigation measures. As a result, these GHG reduction measures may be eliminated from the Project’s design altogether. (Ex. 1, pp. 11-13.) Therefore, there is no guarantee that any of the IS/MND’s GHG reduction measures will be implemented, monitored, and enforced on the Project site. (Id., p. 13.) Therefore, in incorrectly including several GHG mitigation measures without properly committing to their implementation, “the Project’s GHG analysis is insufficient and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.” (Id.) Thus, “an EIR is prepared to include the applicable strategies from the City’s GHG Reduction Plan as formal mitigation measures.” (Id.) CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, LIUNA requests that an EIR be prepared for the Project and that it be circulated for public review and comment in accordance with CEQA. LIUNA reserves the right to supplement these comments in advance of and during public hearings concerning the Project. (Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist., 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121 (1997).) Thank you for your consideration of these comments. S ncerely, Victoria Yundt LOZEAU | DRURY LLP EXHIBIT 1 2656 29th Street, Suite 201 Santa Monica, CA 90405 Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg. (949) 887-9013 mhagemann@swape.com Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD (310) 795-2335 prosenfeld@swape.com November 1, 2023 Victoria Yundt Lozeau | Drury LLP 1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150 Oakland, CA 94618 Subject: Comments on the Development Permit Application Project No. P22-04122 Dear Ms. Yundt, We have reviewed the May 2023 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) for the Development Permit Application No. P22-04122 (“Project”) located in the City of Fresno (“City”). The Project proposes to construct 104,867-sqaure-feet (“SF”) of retail space and 298 parking spaces on an 8- acre site. Our review concludes that the IS/MND fails to adequately evaluate the Project’s air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project may be underestimated and inadequately addressed. An Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts that the project may have on the environment. Air Quality Failure to Provide Complete CalEEMod Output Files Land use development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) typically evaluate air quality impacts and calculate potential criteria air pollutant emissions using the California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”). 1 CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user 1 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide. 2 can change the default values and input project-specific values, but CEQA requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the Project’s construction and operational emissions are calculated, and “output files” are generated. These output files disclose to the reader what parameters are utilized in calculating the Project’s air pollutant emissions and make known which default values are changed as well as provide justification for the values selected. According to the IS/MND, CalEEMod Version 2022.1 is relied upon to estimate Project emissions (p. 4.2- 10). However, this poses a problem as the currently available version of CalEEMod 2022.1 is described as a “soft release” which fails to provide complete output files.2 Specifically, the “User Changes to Default Data” table no longer provides the quantitative counterparts to the changes to the default values (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 66): However, previous CalEEMod Versions, such as 2020.4.0, include the specific numeric changes to the model’s default values (see example excerpt below): The output files associated with CalEEMod Version 2022.1 fail to present the exact parameters used to calculate Project emissions. To remedy this issue, the IS/MND should have provided access to the model’s “.JSON” output files, which allow third parties to review the model’s revised input parameters.3 Without access to the complete output files, including the specific numeric changes to the default values, we cannot verify that the IS/MND’s air modeling and subsequent analysis is an accurate 2 “CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model Soft Release.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2022, available at: https://caleemod.com/. 3 “Video Tutorials for CalEEMod Version 2022.1.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2022, available at: https://www.caleemod.com/tutorials. 3 reflection of the proposed Project. As a result, an EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that correctly provides the complete output files for CalEEMod Version 2022.1, or includes an updated air model using an older release of CalEEMod.4 Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “Living Spaces Fresno Project Custom Report” model includes changes to the default construction schedule (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 66). As a result of these changes, the model includes the following construction schedule (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 56): As previously stated, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any changes to model defaults be justified.5 As demonstrated above in the “User Changes to Default Data” table, the justification provided for these changes is: “Construction would start in June 2023 and occur for 10 months. Overlap of building construction and architectural coating” (Appendix A, pp. 66). Regarding the Project’s anticipated construction duration, the IS/MND states: “Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to begin in June 2023 and continue for a period of 10 months” (p. 30). However, the changes to the individual construction phase lengths remain unsubstantiated. While the IS/MND states that the total duration of Project construction would be 10 months, the IS/MND fails to substantiate the individual construction phase lengths. Until specific evidence is provided, the model 4 “CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/download-model. 5 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 1, 14. 4 should have included proportionately altered individual phase lengths to match the proposed construction duration of 10 months. The construction schedule included in the model presents an issue, as the construction emissions are improperly spread out over a longer period of time for some phases, but not for others. According to the CalEEMod User’s Guide, each construction phase is associated with different emissions activities (see excerpt below).6 By disproportionately altering and extending some of the individual construction phase lengths without proper justification, the model assumes there are a greater number of days to complete the construction activities required by the prolonged phases. As a result, there will be less construction activities required per day and, consequently, less pollutants emitted per day. Until we are able to verify the revised construction schedule, the model may underestimate the peak daily emissions associated with some phases of construction and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Inadequately Evaluated The IS/MND concludes that the Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational health risk analysis (“HRA”). Regarding the health risk impacts associated with Project construction and operation, the IS/MND states: “Construction of the proposed project may expose surrounding sensitive receptors to airborne particulates, as well as a small quantity of construction equipment pollutants (i.e., usually diesel- fueled vehicles and equipment). However, construction contractors would be required to implement measures to reduce or eliminate emissions by following the Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions as required by Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Project construction emissions would be below the SJVAPCD significance thresholds. Once the proposed project is constructed, the proposed project would not be a significant source of long-term operational emissions. 6 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 32. 5 Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project operation. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation” (p. 32). As demonstrated above, the IS/MND claims that Project would have a less-than-significant health risk impact as criteria air pollutant emissions would not exceed the relevant significance thresholds. However, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for three reasons. First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to make “a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project’s air quality impacts to likely health consequences.”7 This poses a problem, as according to the IS/MND, construction of the Project would produce DPM emissions through the exhaust stacks of construction equipment over a duration of approximately 10 months (p. 4). Furthermore, according to the IS/MND provided, operation of the Project is anticipated to generate approximately 311 daily unadjusted driveway trips, which would produce additional exhaust emissions and continue to expose nearby, existing sensitive receptors to DPM emissions (p. 31). However, the IS/MND and associated documents fail to evaluate the toxic air contaminant (“TAC”) emissions associated with Project construction and operation or indicate the concentrations at which such pollutants would trigger adverse health effects. Without making a reasonable effort to connect the Project’s TAC emissions to the potential health risks posed to nearby receptors, the IS/MND is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to correlate Project-generated emissions with potential adverse impacts on human health. Third, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”), the organization responsible for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, released its most recent Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments in February 2015. This guidance document describes the types of projects that warrant the preparation of an HRA. Specifically, OEHHA recommends that all short-term projects lasting at least 2 months assess cancer risks.8 Furthermore, according to OEHHA: “Exposure from projects lasting more than 6 months should be evaluated for the duration of the project. In all cases, for assessing risk to residential receptors, the exposure should be assumed to start in the third trimester to allow for the use of the ASFs (OEHHA, 2009).”9 As the Project’s anticipated construction duration of up to 10 months exceeds the 2-month and 6-month requirements set forth by OEHHA, construction of the Project meets the threshold warranting a quantified HRA under OEHHA guidance and should be evaluated for the entire construction period. Furthermore, OEHHA recommends that an exposure duration of 30 years should be used to estimate 7 “Sierra Club v. County of Fresno.” Supreme Court of California, December 2018, available at: https://ceqaportal.org/decisions/1907/Sierra%20Club%20v.%20County%20of%20Fresno.pdf. 8 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-18. 9 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-18. 6 the individual cancer risk at the maximally exposed individual resident (“MEIR”).10 While the IS/MND fails to provide the expected lifetime of the proposed Project, we can reasonably assume that the Project would operate for at least 30 years, if not more. Therefore, operation of the Project also exceeds the 2-month and 6-month requirements set forth by OEHHA and should be evaluated for the entire 30- year residential exposure duration, as indicated by OEHHA guidance. These recommendations reflect the most recent state health risk policies, and as such, an EIR should be prepared to include an analysis of health risk impacts posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project-generated DPM emissions. Third, by claiming a less than significant impact without conducting a quantified construction or operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the Project’s combined excess cancer risk to the applicable SJVAPCD’s specific numeric threshold of 20 in one million. The IS/MND should require all future projects to conduct an HRA comparing the excess cancer risk impact to the SJVAPCD’s specific numeric threshold of 20 in one million in a formal mitigation measure. Pursuant to CEQA and SJAVPCD guidance, an analysis of the health risk posed to nearby, existing receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted. Screening-Level Analysis Demonstrates Potentially Significant Health Risk Impact In order to conduct our screening-level risk assessment we relied upon AERSCREEN, which is a screening level air quality dispersion model.11 As discussed above, the model replaced SCREEN3, and AERSCREEN is included in the OEHHA and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Associated (“CAPCOA”) guidance as the appropriate air dispersion model for Level 2 health risk screening assessments (“HRSAs”).12, 13 A Level 2 HRSA utilizes a limited amount of site-specific information to generate maximum reasonable downwind concentrations of air contaminants to which nearby sensitive receptors may be exposed. If an unacceptable air quality hazard is determined to be possible using AERSCREEN, a more refined modeling approach is required prior to approval of the Project. We prepared a preliminary HRA of the Project’s construction and operational health risk impact to residential sensitive receptors using the annual PM10 exhaust estimates from the DEIR’s CalEEMod output files. Consistent with recommendations set forth by OEHHA, we assumed residential exposure begins during the third trimester stage of life.14 The IS/MND’s CalEEMod model indicates that construction activities will generate approximately 1,751 pounds of DPM over the 305-day construction period.15 The AERSCREEN model relies on a continuous average emission rate to simulate maximum downward concentrations from point, area, and volume emission sources. To account for the variability 10 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 2-4. 11 “AERSCREEN Released as the EPA Recommended Screening Model,” U.S. EPA, April 2011, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/clarification/20110411_AERSCREEN_Release_Memo.pdf 12 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. 13 “Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects.” CAPCOA, July 2009, available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/CAPCOA_HRA_LU_Guidelines_8-6-09.pdf. 14 “Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-18. 15 See Attachment A for health risk calculations. 7 in equipment usage and truck trips over Project construction, we calculated an average DPM emission rate by the following equation: 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 �𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠�= 1,750.9 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝐸𝐸305 𝑠𝑠𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑𝐸𝐸 × 453.6 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝐸𝐸 × 1 𝑠𝑠𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑24 ℎ𝐸𝐸𝑜𝑜𝑔𝑔𝐸𝐸 × 1 ℎ𝐸𝐸𝑜𝑜𝑔𝑔3,600 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸 =𝟎𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝒈𝒈/𝒔𝒔 Using this equation, we estimated a construction emission rate of 0.03014 grams per second (“g/s”). Subtracting the 305-day construction period from the total residential duration of 30 years, we assumed that after Project construction, the sensitive receptor would be exposed to the Project’s operational DPM for an additional 29.1 years. The IS/MND’s operational CalEEMod emissions indicate that operational activities will generate approximately 20 pounds of DPM per year throughout operation. Applying the same equation used to estimate the construction DPM rate, we estimated the following emission rate for Project operation: 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 �𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠�= 20 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝐸𝐸 365 𝑠𝑠𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑𝐸𝐸 × 453.6 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝐸𝐸 × 1 𝑠𝑠𝑅𝑅𝑑𝑑24 ℎ𝐸𝐸𝑜𝑜𝑔𝑔𝐸𝐸 × 1 ℎ𝐸𝐸𝑜𝑜𝑔𝑔3,600 𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠𝐸𝐸=𝟎𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝒈𝒈/𝒔𝒔 Using this equation, we estimated an operational emission rate of 0.000288 g/s. Construction and operation were simulated as an 8-acre rectangular area source in AERSCREEN, with approximate dimensions of 254- by 127-meters. A release height of three meters was selected to represent the height of stacks of operational equipment and other heavy-duty vehicles, and an initial vertical dimension of one and a half meters was used to simulate instantaneous plume dispersion upon release. An urban meteorological setting was selected with model-default inputs for wind speed and direction distribution. The population of Fresno was obtained from U.S. 2020 Census data.16 The AERSCREEN model generates maximum reasonable estimates of single-hour DPM concentrations from the Project Site. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“U.S. EPA”) suggests that the annualized average concentration of an air pollutant be estimated by multiplying the single-hour concentration by 10% in screening procedures.17 According to the IS/MND, the nearest sensitive receptors is located approximately 65 feet, or 20 meters, of the Project site (p. 32). However, review of the AERSCREEN output files demonstrates that the MEIR is located approximately 125 meters from the Project site. Thus, the single-hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN for Project construction is approximately 1.816 µg/m3 DPM at approximately 125 meters downwind. Multiplying this single-hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized average concentration of 0.1816 µg/m3 for Project construction at the MEIR. For Project operation, the single-hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN is 0.3172 µg/m3 DPM at approximately 125 meters downwind. Multiplying this single-hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized average concentration of 0.03172 µg/m3 for Project operation at the MEIR.18 16 “Fresno.” U.S. Census Bureau, 2020, available at: https://datacommons.org/place/geoId/0627000. 17 “Screening Procedures for Estimating the Air Quality Impact of Stationary Sources Revised.” U.S. EPA, October 1992, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/EPA-454R-92-019_OCR.pdf. 18 See Attachment B for AERSCREEN output files. 8 We calculated the excess cancer risk to the MEIR using applicable HRA methodologies prescribed by OEHHA, as recommended by SJVAPCD.19 Specifically, guidance from OEHHA and the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) recommends the use of a standard point estimate approach, including high- point estimate (i.e. 95th percentile) breathing rates and age sensitivity factors (“ASF”) in order to account for the increased sensitivity to carcinogens during early-in-life exposure and accurately assess risk for susceptible subpopulations such as children. The residential exposure parameters, such as the daily breathing rates (“BR/BW”), exposure duration (“ED”), age sensitivity factors (“ASF”), fraction of time at home (“FAH”), and exposure frequency (“EF”) utilized for the various age groups in our screening-level HRA are as follows: Exposure Assumptions for Residential Individual Cancer Risk Age Group Breathing Rate (L/kg-day)20 Age Sensitivity Factor 21 Exposure Duration (years) Fraction of Time at Home22 Exposure Frequency (days/year)23 Exposure Time (hours/day) 3rd Trimester 361 10 0.25 1 350 24 Infant (0 - 2) 1090 10 2 1 350 24 Child (2 - 16) 572 3 14 1 350 24 Adult (16 - 30) 261 1 14 0.73 350 24 For the inhalation pathway, the procedure requires the incorporation of several discrete variates to effectively quantify dose for each age group. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by the cancer potency factor (“CPF”) in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day-1) to derive the cancer risk estimate. To assess exposures, we utilized the following dose algorithm: 19 “Update to District’s Risk Management Policy to Address OEHHA’s Revised Risk Assessment Guidance Document.” SJVAPCD, May 2015, available at: https://www.valleyair.org/busind/pto/staff-report-5-28-15.pdf. 20 “Supplemental Guidelines for Preparing Risk Assessments for the Air Toxics ‘Hot Spots’ Information and Assessment Act.” SCAQMD, October 2020, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/risk- assessment/ab-2588-supplemental-guidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=19, p. 19; see also “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/cr nr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. 21 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-5 Table 8.3. 22 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 5-24. 23 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 5-24. 9 𝐷𝐷𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴,𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑝𝑝 𝑎𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑝𝑝= 𝐶𝐶𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑝𝑝× 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 × �𝐵𝐵𝑅𝑅𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵� × 𝐴𝐴 × 𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸 where: DoseAIR = dose by inhalation (mg/kg/day), per age group Cair = concentration of contaminant in air (μg/m3) EF = exposure frequency (number of days/365 days) BR/BW = daily breathing rate normalized to body weight (L/kg/day) A = inhalation absorption factor (default = 1) CF = conversion factor (1x10-6, μg to mg, L to m3) To calculate the overall cancer risk, we used the following equation for each appropriate age group: 𝐶𝐶𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠𝑅𝑅𝑔𝑔 𝑅𝑅𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴= 𝐷𝐷𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑅𝑅𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 × 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸 × 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐸𝐸 × 𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝐹𝐹 × 𝐸𝐸𝐷𝐷𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 where: DoseAIR = dose by inhalation (mg/kg/day), per age group CPF = cancer potency factor, chemical-specific (mg/kg/day)-1 ASF = age sensitivity factor, per age group FAH = fraction of time at home, per age group (for residential receptors only) ED = exposure duration (years) AT = averaging time period over which exposure duration is averaged (always 70 years) Consistent with the 305-day construction schedule, the annualized average concentration for construction was used for the entire third trimester of pregnancy (0.25 years) and the first 0.59 years of the infantile stage of life (0 – 2 years). The annualized average concentration for operation was used for the remainder of the 30-year exposure period, which makes up the latter 1.41 years of the infantile stage of life, the entire child stage of life (2 – 16 years), as well as the entire adult (16 – 30 years) stage of life. The results of our calculations are shown in the table below. 10 The Maximally Exposed Individual at an Existing Residential Receptor Age Group Emissions Source Duration (years) Concentration (ug/m3) Cancer Risk 3rd Trimester Construction 0.25 0.1816 2.10E-06 Infant (0 - 2) Construction 0.25 2.11E-05 Construction 0.59 0.1816 1.48E-05 Operation 1.41 0.0317 6.26E-06 Child (2 - 16) Total 14 0.0317 8.27E-06 Adult (16 - 30) Operation 14 0.0317 1.27E-06 Lifetime 30 3.28E-05 As demonstrated in the table above, the excess cancer risks to the 3rd trimester of pregnancy and infant receptors at the MEIR located approximately 125 meters away, over the course of Project construction, are approximately 2.10, 21.1, 8.27, and 1.27 in one million, respectively. The total excess cancer risk associated with Project construction is approximately 32.8 in one million. The infant and lifetime cancer risks exceed the SJVAPCD threshold of 20 in one million, resulting in a potentially significant impact not previously addressed or identified by the IS/MND. Our analysis represents a screening-level HRA, which is known to be conservative and tends to err on the side of health protection. The purpose of the screening-level HRA is to demonstrate the potential link between Project-generated emissions and adverse health risk impacts. According to the U.S. EPA: “EPA’s Exposure Assessment Guidelines recommend completing exposure assessments iteratively using a tiered approach to ‘strike a balance between the costs of adding detail and refinement to an assessment and the benefits associated with that additional refinement’ (U.S. EPA, 1992). In other words, an assessment using basic tools (e.g., simple exposure calculations, default values, rules of thumb, conservative assumptions) can be conducted as the first phase (or tier) of the overall assessment (i.e., a screening-level assessment). The exposure assessor or risk manager can then determine whether the results of the screening- level assessment warrant further evaluation through refinements of the input data and exposure assumptions or by using more advanced models.” As demonstrated above, screening-level analyses warrant further evaluation in a refined modeling approach. As our screening-level HRA demonstrates that construction and operation of the Project could 11 result in a potentially significant health risk impact, an EIR analysis should be prepared to include a refined health risk analysis which adequately and accurately evaluates health risk impacts associated with both Project construction and operation. Greenhouse Gas Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts Pursuant with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the IS/MND claims the Project is consistent with the Fresno General Plan (“GP”), stating: “The City of Fresno updated its 2014 GHG Reduction Plan in the year 2021 (GHG Reduction Plan Update) to conform with existing applicable State climate change policies and regulations to reduce local community GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030, consistent with the State objectives set by SB 32. The GHG Reduction Plan Update outlines strategies that the city will undertake to achieve its proportional share of GHG emission reductions. The GHG Reduction Plan Update includes a Consistency IS/MND to help the city provide a streamlined review process for new development projects that are subject to discretionary review pursuant to CEQA. This analysis evaluates the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan Update” (p. 58). As demonstrated above, the 2021 GHG Reduction Plan includes an update to the 2014 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. Furthermore, the GHG Reduction plan Project Consistency IS/MND states: “GHG Reduction Plan Update consistency review involves the evaluation of project consistency with the applicable strategies of the GHG Reduction Plan Update. The GHG reduction strategies identified in the GHG Reduction Plan Update relies upon the General Plan and additional local measures as the basis of the development related strategies to reduce GHG emissions. This IS/MND is developed based on the key local GHG reduction strategies and actions identified in the GHG Reduction Plan Update that are applicable to proposed development projects. Note that not all strategies listed below will apply to all projects. For example, not all projects will meet mixed-use related policies of the General Plan, because not all projects are required to be mixed use” (Appendix D, pp. 111). As discussed above, the IS/MND concludes that the Project would result in a less-than-significant greenhouse gas (“GHG”) impact based on the Project’s consistency with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan. Specifically, the IS/MND claims that the Project would be consistent with the applicable strategies (see excerpt below) (pp. 111, 112, 113; Table 3). 12 13 However, the IS/MND’s claim that the Project is consistent with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan, and the subsequent less-than-significant impact conclusion, is unsupported, as the IS/MND fails to implement the above-mentioned reduction measures as formal mitigation measures. According to the AEP CEQA Portal Topic Paper on Mitigation Measures: “While not “mitigation”, a good practice is to include those project design feature(s) that address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). Often the MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without understanding the resulting environmental impact.”24 As demonstrated above, measures that are not formally included as mitigation measures may be eliminated from the Project’s design altogether. Thus, we cannot guarantee that the above-mentioned reduction strategies would be implemented, monitored, and enforced on the Project site. As such, the IS/MND fails to demonstrate consistency with the GHG Reduction Plan Update. Until an EIR is prepared to include the applicable strategies from the City’s GHG Reduction Plan as formal mitigation measures, the Project’s GHG analysis is insufficient and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality, health risk, and GHG impacts that should be mitigated further. As such, in an effort to reduce the Project’s emissions, we identified several mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project. Therefore, to reduce the Project’s emissions, we recommend consideration of SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS PEIR’s Air Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures (“PMM-AQ-1”) and Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures (“PMM-GHG-1”), as described below: 25 SCAG RTP/SCS 2020-2045 Air Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures – PMM-AQ-1: 24 “CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures.” AEP, February 2020, available at: https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Mitigation%202020.pdf, p. 6. 25 “4.0 Mitigation Measures.” Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report Addendum #1, September 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/fpeir_connectsocal_addendum_4_mitigationmeasures.pdf?1606004420, p. 4.0-2 – 4.0-10; 4.0-19 – 4.0-23; See also: “Certified Final Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report.” Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), May 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/peir. 14 In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to violating air quality standards. Such measures may include the following or other comparable measures identified by the Lead Agency: a) Minimize land disturbance. b) Suspend grading and earth moving when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dust plumes. f) Minimize unnecessary vehicular and machinery activities. h) Revegetate disturbed land, including vehicular paths created during construction to avoid future off-road vehicular activities. i) On Caltrans projects, Caltrans Standard Specifications 10-Dust Control, 17-Watering, and 18-Dust Palliative shall be incorporated into project specifications. j) Require contractors to assemble a comprehensive inventory list (i.e., make, model, engine year, horsepower, emission rates) of all heavy-duty off-road (portable and mobile) equipment (50 horsepower and greater) that could be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours for the construction project. Prepare a plan for approval by the applicable air district demonstrating achievement of the applicable percent reduction for a CARB-approved fleet. k) Ensure that all construction equipment is properly tuned and maintained. l) Minimize idling time to 5 minutes—saves fuel and reduces emissions. m) Provide an operational water truck on-site at all times. Use watering trucks to minimize dust; watering should be sufficient to confine dust plumes to the project work areas. Sweep paved streets at least once per day where there is evidence of dirt that has been carried on to the roadway. n) Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean fuel generators rather than temporary power generators. o) Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities. The plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation, and satellite parking areas with a shuttle service. Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours. Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes. Provide a flag person to guide traffic properly and ensure safety at construction sites. p) As appropriate require that portable engines and portable engine-driven equipment units used at the project work site, with the exception of on-road and off-road motor vehicles, obtain CARB Portable Equipment Registration with the state or a local district permit. Arrange appropriate consultations with the CARB or the District to determine registration and permitting requirements prior to equipment operation at the site. q) Require projects within 500 feet of residences, hospitals, or schools to use Tier 4 equipment for all engines above 50 horsepower (hp) unless the individual project can demonstrate that Tier 4 engines would not be required to mitigate emissions below significance thresholds. r) Projects located within the South Coast Air Basin should consider applying for South Coast AQMD “SOON” funds which provides funds to applicable fleets for the purchase of commercially available low-emission heavy- duty engines to achieve near-term reduction of NOx emissions from in-use off-road diesel vehicles. s) Projects located within AB 617 communities should review the applicable Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) for additional mitigation that can be applied to individual projects. t) Where applicable, projects should provide information about air quality related programs to schools, including the Environmental Justice Community Partnerships (EJCP), Clean Air Ranger Education (CARE), and Why Air Quality Matters programs. u) Projects should work with local cities and counties to install adequate signage that prohibits truck idling in certain locations (e.g., near schools and sensitive receptors). 15 y) Projects that will introduce sensitive receptors within 500 feet of freeways and other sources should consider installing high efficiency of enhanced filtration units, such as Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 or better. Installation of enhanced filtration units can be verified during occupancy inspection prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. z) Develop an ongoing monitoring, inspection, and maintenance program for the MERV filters. aa) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income and/or minority communities. bb) The following criteria related to diesel emissions shall be implemented on by individual project sponsors as appropriate and feasible: - Diesel nonroad vehicles on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines that meet EPA on road emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85% - Diesel generators on site for more than 10 total days shall be equipped with emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85%. - Nonroad diesel engines on site shall be Tier 2 or higher. - Diesel nonroad construction equipment on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines meeting EPA Tier 4 nonroad emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB for use with nonroad engines to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85% for engines for 50 hp and greater and by a minimum of 20% for engines less than 50 hp. - Emission control technology shall be operated, maintained, and serviced as recommended by the emission control technology manufacturer. - Diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators on site shall be fueled with ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD) or a biodiesel blend approved by the original engine manufacturer with sulfur content of 15 ppm or less. - The construction contractor shall maintain a list of all diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators to be used on site. The list shall include the following: i. Contractor and subcontractor name and address, plus contact person responsible for the vehicles or equipment. ii. Equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment serial number, engine manufacturer, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, engine serial number, and expected fuel usage and hours of operation. iii. For the emission control technology installed: technology type, serial number, make, model, manufacturer, EPA/CARB verification number/level, and installation date and hour-meter reading on installation date. - The contractor shall establish generator sites and truck-staging zones for vehicles waiting to load or unload material on site. Such zones shall be located where diesel emissions have the least impact on abutters, the general public, and especially sensitive receptors such as hospitals, schools, daycare facilities, elderly housing, and convalescent facilities. - The contractor shall maintain a monthly report that, for each on road diesel vehicle, nonroad construction equipment, or generator onsite, includes: i. Hour-meter readings on arrival on-site, the first and last day of every month, and on off-site date. ii. Any problems with the equipment or emission controls. iii. Certified copies of fuel deliveries for the time period that identify: 1. Source of supply 2. Quantity of fuel 3. Quantity of fuel, including sulfur content (percent by weight) cc) Project should exceed Title-24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards (California Building Standards Code). The following measures can be used to increase energy efficiency: - Provide pedestrian network improvements, such as interconnected street network, narrower roadways and shorter block lengths, sidewalks, accessibility to transit and transit shelters, traffic calming measures, parks and public spaces, minimize pedestrian barriers. 16 -Provide traffic calming measures, such as: i.Marked crosswalks ii.Count-down signal timers iii.Curb extensions iv. Speed tables iv.Raised crosswalks v.Raised intersections vi.Median islands vii.Tight corner radii viii.Roundabouts or mini-circles ix.On-street parking x.Chicanes/chokers -Create urban non-motorized zones -Provide bike parking in non-residential and multi-unit residential projects -Dedicate land for bike trails -Limit parking supply through: i.Elimination (or reduction) of minimum parking requirements ii.Creation of maximum parking requirements iii.Provision of shared parking -Require residential area parking permit. -Provide ride-sharing programs i.Designate a certain percentage of parking spacing for ride sharing vehicles ii.Designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride-sharing vehicles iii.Providing a web site or messaging board for coordinating rides iv.Permanent transportation management association membership and finding requirement. Greenhouse Gas Project Level Mitigation Measures – PMM-GHG-1 In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to violating air quality standards. Such measures may include the following or other comparable measures identified by the Lead Agency: b)Reduce emissions resulting from projects through implementation of project features, project design, or other measures, such as those described in Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines. c) Include off-site measures to mitigate a project’s emissions. d) Measures that consider incorporation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) during design, construction and operation of projects to minimize GHG emissions, including but not limited to: i.Use energy and fuel-efficient vehicles and equipment; ii.Deployment of zero- and/or near zero emission technologies; iii.Use lighting systems that are energy efficient, such as LED technology; iv.Use the minimum feasible amount of GHG-emitting construction materials; v.Use cement blended with the maximum feasible amount of flash or other materials that reduce GHG emissions from cement production; vi.Incorporate design measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse; vii.Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase use of renewable energy; viii.Incorporate design measures to reduce water consumption; ix.Use lighter-colored pavement where feasible; x.Recycle construction debris to maximum extent feasible; 17 xi. Plant shade trees in or near construction projects where feasible; and xii. Solicit bids that include concepts listed above. e) Measures that encourage transit use, carpooling, bike-share and car-share programs, active transportation, and parking strategies, including, but not limited to the following: i. Promote transit-active transportation coordinated strategies; ii. Increase bicycle carrying capacity on transit and rail vehicles; iii. Improve or increase access to transit; iv. Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and day care; v. Incorporate affordable housing into the project; vi. Incorporate the neighborhood electric vehicle network; vii. Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; viii. Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; ix. Provide traffic calming measures; x. Provide bicycle parking; xi. Limit or eliminate park supply; xii. Unbundle parking costs; xiii. Provide parking cash-out programs; xiv. Implement or provide access to commute reduction program; f) Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities into project designs, maintaining these facilities, and providing amenities incentivizing their use; and planning for and building local bicycle projects that connect with the regional network; g) Improving transit access to rail and bus routes by incentives for construction and transit facilities within developments, and/or providing dedicated shuttle service to transit stations; and h) Adopting employer trip reduction measures to reduce employee trips such as vanpool and carpool programs, providing end-of-trip facilities, and telecommuting programs including but not limited to measures that: i. Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs; ii. Provide transit passes; iii. Shift single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride- matching services; iv. Provide incentives or subsidies that increase that use of modes other than single-occupancy vehicle; v. Provide on-site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools, secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms; vi. Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites; vii. Provide a guaranteed ride home service to users of non-auto modes. i) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high-occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles; j) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including: i. Developing on infill and brownfields sites; ii. Building compact and mixed-use developments near transit; iii. Retaining on-site mature trees and vegetation, and planting new canopy trees; iv. Measures that increase vehicle efficiency, encourage use of zero and low emissions vehicles, or reduce the carbon content of fuels, including constructing or encouraging construction of electric vehicle charging stations or neighborhood electric vehicle networks, or charging for electric bicycles; and 18 v.Measures to reduce GHG emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse. k) Consult the SCAG Environmental Justice Toolbox for potential measures to address impacts to low-income and/or minority communities. The measures provided above are also intended to be applied in low income and minority communities as applicable and feasible. l) Require at least five percent of all vehicle parking spaces include electric vehicle charging stations, or at a minimum, require the appropriate infrastructure to facilitate sufficient electric charging for passenger vehicles and trucks to plug-in. m)Encourage telecommuting and alternative work schedules, such as: i.Staggered starting times ii.Flexible schedules iii.Compressed work weeks n) Implement commute trip reduction marketing, such as: i.New employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options ii.Event promotions iii.Publications o)Implement preferential parking permit program p) Implement school pool and bus programs q) Price workplace parking, such as: i.Explicitly charging for parking for its employees; ii.Implementing above market rate pricing; iii.Validating parking only for invited guests; iv.Not providing employee parking and transportation allowances; and v.Educating employees about available alternatives. These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower-emitting design features into the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduces emissions released during Project construction and operation. Furthermore, as it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045, we emphasize the applicability of incorporating solar power system into the Project design. Until the feasibility of incorporating on-site renewable energy production is considered, the Project should not be approved. An EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as include updated air quality, health risk, and GHG analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are implemented to reduce emissions to below thresholds. The EIR should also demonstrate a commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the Project’s significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible. Disclaimer SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional 19 information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties. Sincerely, M Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Attachment A: Updated Health Risk Calculations Attachment B: AERSCREEN Output Files Attachment C: Matt Hagemann CV Attachment D: Paul Rosenfeld CV Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.06 Total DPM (lbs)95.67123288 Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.01 Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.328767123 Total DPM (g)43396.47123 Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.054794521 Construction Duration (days)284 Emission Rate (g/s)0.0016468 Total DPM (lbs)20 Total DPM (lbs)93.36986301 Release Height (meters)3 Emission Rate (g/s)0.000287671 Total DPM (g)42352.56986 Total Acreage 8 Release Height (meters)3 Start Date 6/5/2023 Max Horizontal (meters)254.46 Total Acreage 8 End Date 3/15/2024 Min Horizontal (meters)127.23 Max Horizontal (meters)254.46 Construction Days 284 Initial Vertical Dimension (meters)1.5 Min Horizontal (meters)127.23 Setting Fresno Initial Vertical Dimension (meters)1.5 Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.02 Population 544,510 Setting Fresno Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.109589041 Start Date 6/5/2023 Population 544,510 Construction Duration (days)21 End Date 4/5/2024 Total DPM (lbs)2.301369863 Total Construction Days 305 Total DPM (g)1043.90137 Total Years of Construction 0.84 Start Date 3/15/2024 Total Years of Operation 29.16 End Date 4/5/2024 Construction Days 21 Construction Operation 2023 Total Emission Rate 2024 Attachment A AERSCREEN 21112 / AERMOD 21112 10/30/23 13:36:42 TITLE: Living Spaces, Operational ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ****************************** AREA PARAMETERS **************************** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ SOURCE EMISSION RATE: 0.288E‐03 g/s 0.228E‐02 lb/hr AREA EMISSION RATE:0.889E‐08 g/(s‐m2) 0.705E‐07 lb/(hr‐m2) AREA HEIGHT:3.00 meters 9.84 feet AREA SOURCE LONG SIDE:254.46 meters 834.84 feet AREA SOURCE SHORT SIDE:127.23 meters 417.42 feet INITIAL VERTICAL DIMENSION: 1.50 meters 4.92 feet RURAL OR URBAN:URBAN POPULATION:544510 INITIAL PROBE DISTANCE =5000. meters 16404. feet ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ *********************** BUILDING DOWNWASH PARAMETERS ********************** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ BUILDING DOWNWASH NOT USED FOR NON‐POINT SOURCES ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ************************** FLOW SECTOR ANALYSIS *************************** 25 meter receptor spacing: 1. meters ‐ 5000. meters ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MAXIMUM IMPACT RECEPTOR Zo SURFACE 1‐HR CONC RADIAL DIST TEMPORAL SECTOR ROUGHNESS (ug/m3) (deg) (m) PERIOD ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1* 1.000 0.3172 0 125.0 WIN * = worst case diagonal ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Attachment B ********************** MAKEMET METEOROLOGY PARAMETERS ********************* ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MIN/MAX TEMPERATURE: 250.0 / 310.0 (K) MINIMUM WIND SPEED: 0.5 m/s ANEMOMETER HEIGHT: 10.000 meters SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS INPUT: AERMET SEASONAL TABLES DOMINANT SURFACE PROFILE: Urban DOMINANT CLIMATE TYPE: Average Moisture DOMINANT SEASON: Winter ALBEDO: 0.35 BOWEN RATIO: 1.50 ROUGHNESS LENGTH: 1.000 (meters) SURFACE FRICTION VELOCITY (U*) NOT ADUSTED METEOROLOGY CONDITIONS USED TO PREDICT OVERALL MAXIMUM IMPACT ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ YR MO DY JDY HR ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐ 10 01 10 10 01 H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M‐O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐1.30 0.043 ‐9.000 0.020 ‐999. 21. 6.0 1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 HT REF TA HT ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10.0 310.0 2.0 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ************************ AERSCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES ********************** OVERALL MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS BY DISTANCE ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MAXIMUM MAXIMUM DIST 1‐HR CONC DIST 1‐HR CONC (m) (ug/m3) (m) (ug/m3) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1.00 0.2457 2525.00 0.5096E‐02 25.00 0.2635 2550.00 0.5028E‐02 50.00 0.2789 2575.00 0.4961E‐02 75.00 0.2921 2600.00 0.4896E‐02 100.00 0.3034 2625.00 0.4832E‐02 125.00 0.3172 2650.00 0.4770E‐02 150.00 0.2621 2675.00 0.4709E‐02 175.00 0.1875 2700.00 0.4649E‐02 200.00 0.1528 2725.00 0.4591E‐02 225.00 0.1309 2750.00 0.4534E‐02 250.00 0.1140 2775.00 0.4478E‐02 275.00 0.1005 2800.00 0.4424E‐02 300.00 0.8956E‐01 2825.00 0.4370E‐02 325.00 0.8050E‐01 2850.00 0.4318E‐02 350.00 0.7296E‐01 2875.00 0.4266E‐02 375.00 0.6653E‐01 2900.00 0.4216E‐02 400.00 0.6105E‐01 2925.00 0.4167E‐02 425.00 0.5627E‐01 2950.00 0.4119E‐02 450.00 0.5215E‐01 2975.00 0.4071E‐02 475.00 0.4850E‐01 3000.00 0.4025E‐02 500.00 0.4528E‐01 3025.00 0.3979E‐02 525.00 0.4242E‐01 3050.00 0.3935E‐02 550.00 0.3984E‐01 3075.00 0.3891E‐02 575.00 0.3752E‐01 3100.00 0.3848E‐02 600.00 0.3544E‐01 3125.00 0.3806E‐02 625.00 0.3356E‐01 3150.00 0.3765E‐02 650.00 0.3185E‐01 3175.00 0.3724E‐02 675.00 0.3026E‐01 3199.99 0.3685E‐02 700.00 0.2881E‐01 3225.00 0.3645E‐02 725.00 0.2747E‐01 3250.00 0.3607E‐02 750.00 0.2625E‐01 3275.00 0.3570E‐02 775.00 0.2511E‐01 3300.00 0.3533E‐02 800.00 0.2407E‐01 3325.00 0.3496E‐02 825.00 0.2309E‐01 3350.00 0.3461E‐02 850.00 0.2217E‐01 3375.00 0.3426E‐02 875.00 0.2132E‐01 3400.00 0.3391E‐02 900.00 0.2053E‐01 3425.00 0.3357E‐02 925.00 0.1978E‐01 3450.00 0.3324E‐02 950.00 0.1908E‐01 3475.00 0.3291E‐02 975.00 0.1842E‐01 3500.00 0.3259E‐02 1000.00 0.1780E‐01 3525.00 0.3228E‐02 1025.00 0.1722E‐01 3550.00 0.3197E‐02 1050.00 0.1667E‐01 3575.00 0.3166E‐02 1075.00 0.1615E‐01 3600.00 0.3136E‐02 1100.00 0.1565E‐01 3625.00 0.3106E‐02 1125.00 0.1518E‐01 3650.00 0.3077E‐02 1150.00 0.1473E‐01 3675.00 0.3049E‐02 1175.00 0.1431E‐01 3700.00 0.3021E‐02 1200.00 0.1391E‐01 3725.00 0.2993E‐02 1225.00 0.1352E‐01 3750.00 0.2966E‐02 1250.00 0.1316E‐01 3775.00 0.2939E‐02 1275.00 0.1281E‐01 3800.00 0.2912E‐02 1300.00 0.1247E‐01 3825.00 0.2886E‐02 1325.00 0.1216E‐01 3849.99 0.2861E‐02 1350.00 0.1185E‐01 3875.00 0.2835E‐02 1375.00 0.1156E‐01 3900.00 0.2811E‐02 1400.00 0.1128E‐01 3925.00 0.2786E‐02 1425.00 0.1102E‐01 3950.00 0.2762E‐02 1450.00 0.1076E‐01 3975.00 0.2738E‐02 1475.00 0.1052E‐01 4000.00 0.2715E‐02 1500.00 0.1028E‐01 4025.00 0.2692E‐02 1525.00 0.1005E‐01 4050.00 0.2669E‐02 1550.00 0.9831E‐02 4075.00 0.2647E‐02 1575.00 0.9620E‐02 4100.00 0.2625E‐02 1600.00 0.9417E‐02 4125.00 0.2603E‐02 1625.00 0.9220E‐02 4149.99 0.2582E‐02 1650.00 0.9030E‐02 4175.00 0.2560E‐02 1675.00 0.8847E‐02 4200.00 0.2540E‐02 1700.00 0.8670E‐02 4225.00 0.2519E‐02 1725.00 0.8499E‐02 4250.00 0.2499E‐02 1750.00 0.8334E‐02 4275.00 0.2479E‐02 1775.00 0.8174E‐02 4300.00 0.2459E‐02 1800.00 0.8020E‐02 4325.00 0.2440E‐02 1825.00 0.7871E‐02 4350.00 0.2421E‐02 1850.00 0.7727E‐02 4375.00 0.2402E‐02 1875.01 0.7587E‐02 4400.00 0.2383E‐02 1900.00 0.7451E‐02 4425.00 0.2365E‐02 1924.99 0.7320E‐02 4450.00 0.2346E‐02 1950.00 0.7193E‐02 4475.00 0.2329E‐02 1975.00 0.7069E‐02 4500.00 0.2311E‐02 2000.00 0.6949E‐02 4525.00 0.2293E‐02 2025.00 0.6833E‐02 4550.00 0.2276E‐02 2050.00 0.6720E‐02 4575.00 0.2259E‐02 2075.00 0.6610E‐02 4600.00 0.2242E‐02 2100.00 0.6503E‐02 4625.00 0.2226E‐02 2125.00 0.6400E‐02 4650.00 0.2209E‐02 2150.00 0.6299E‐02 4675.00 0.2193E‐02 2175.00 0.6201E‐02 4700.00 0.2177E‐02 2200.00 0.6105E‐02 4725.00 0.2162E‐02 2225.00 0.6012E‐02 4750.00 0.2146E‐02 2250.00 0.5922E‐02 4775.00 0.2131E‐02 2275.00 0.5834E‐02 4800.00 0.2116E‐02 2300.00 0.5748E‐02 4825.00 0.2101E‐02 2325.00 0.5664E‐02 4850.00 0.2086E‐02 2350.00 0.5582E‐02 4875.00 0.2071E‐02 2375.00 0.5542E‐02 4900.00 0.2057E‐02 2400.00 0.5463E‐02 4925.00 0.2042E‐02 2425.00 0.5386E‐02 4950.00 0.2028E‐02 2450.00 0.5311E‐02 4975.00 0.2014E‐02 2475.00 0.5238E‐02 5000.00 0.2001E‐02 2500.00 0.5166E‐02 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********************** AERSCREEN MAXIMUM IMPACT SUMMARY ********************* ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 3‐hour, 8‐hour, and 24‐hour scaled concentrations are equal to the 1‐hour concentration as referenced in SCREENING PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE AIR QUALITY IMPACT OF STATIONARY SOURCES, REVISED (Section 4.5.4) Report number EPA‐454/R‐92‐019 http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance_permit.htm under Screening Guidance MAXIMUM SCALED SCALED SCALED SCALED 1‐HOUR 3‐HOUR 8‐HOUR 24‐HOUR ANNUAL CALCULATION CONC CONC CONC CONC CONC PROCEDURE (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ FLAT TERRAIN 0.3184 0.3184 0.3184 0.3184 N/A DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 128.00 meters IMPACT AT THE AMBIENT BOUNDARY 0.2457 0.2457 0.2457 0.2457 N/A DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 1.00 meters AERSCREEN 21112 / AERMOD 21112 10/30/23 13:02:48 TITLE: Living Spaces, Construction ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ****************************** AREA PARAMETERS **************************** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ SOURCE EMISSION RATE: 0.165E‐02 g/s 0.131E‐01 lb/hr AREA EMISSION RATE: 0.509E‐07 g/(s‐m2) 0.404E‐06 lb/(hr‐m2) AREA HEIGHT: 3.00 meters 9.84 feet AREA SOURCE LONG SIDE: 254.46 meters 834.84 feet AREA SOURCE SHORT SIDE: 127.23 meters 417.42 feet INITIAL VERTICAL DIMENSION: 1.50 meters 4.92 feet RURAL OR URBAN: URBAN POPULATION: 544510 INITIAL PROBE DISTANCE = 5000. meters 16404. feet ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ *********************** BUILDING DOWNWASH PARAMETERS ********************** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ BUILDING DOWNWASH NOT USED FOR NON‐POINT SOURCES ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ************************** FLOW SECTOR ANALYSIS *************************** 25 meter receptor spacing: 1. meters ‐ 5000. meters ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MAXIMUM IMPACT RECEPTOR Zo SURFACE 1‐HR CONC RADIAL DIST TEMPORAL SECTOR ROUGHNESS (ug/m3) (deg) (m) PERIOD ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1* 1.000 1.816 0 125.0 WIN * = worst case diagonal ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********************** MAKEMET METEOROLOGY PARAMETERS ********************* ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MIN/MAX TEMPERATURE: 250.0 / 310.0 (K) MINIMUM WIND SPEED: 0.5 m/s ANEMOMETER HEIGHT: 10.000 meters SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS INPUT: AERMET SEASONAL TABLES DOMINANT SURFACE PROFILE: Urban DOMINANT CLIMATE TYPE: Average Moisture DOMINANT SEASON: Winter ALBEDO: 0.35 BOWEN RATIO: 1.50 ROUGHNESS LENGTH: 1.000 (meters) SURFACE FRICTION VELOCITY (U*) NOT ADUSTED METEOROLOGY CONDITIONS USED TO PREDICT OVERALL MAXIMUM IMPACT ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ YR MO DY JDY HR ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐ 10 01 10 10 01 H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M‐O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐1.30 0.043 ‐9.000 0.020 ‐999. 21. 6.0 1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 HT REF TA HT ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10.0 310.0 2.0 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ************************ AERSCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES ********************** OVERALL MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS BY DISTANCE ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ MAXIMUM MAXIMUM DIST 1‐HR CONC DIST 1‐HR CONC (m) (ug/m3) (m) (ug/m3) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1.00 1.407 2525.00 0.2917E‐01 25.00 1.508 2550.00 0.2878E‐01 50.00 1.597 2575.00 0.2840E‐01 75.00 1.672 2600.00 0.2803E‐01 100.00 1.737 2625.00 0.2766E‐01 125.00 1.816 2650.00 0.2731E‐01 150.00 1.501 2675.00 0.2696E‐01 175.00 1.074 2700.00 0.2662E‐01 200.00 0.8747 2725.00 0.2628E‐01 225.00 0.7496 2750.00 0.2596E‐01 250.00 0.6526 2775.00 0.2564E‐01 275.00 0.5753 2800.00 0.2532E‐01 300.00 0.5127 2825.00 0.2502E‐01 325.00 0.4609 2850.00 0.2472E‐01 350.00 0.4177 2875.00 0.2442E‐01 375.00 0.3809 2900.00 0.2414E‐01 400.00 0.3495 2925.00 0.2385E‐01 425.00 0.3221 2950.00 0.2358E‐01 450.00 0.2986 2975.00 0.2331E‐01 475.00 0.2776 3000.00 0.2304E‐01 500.00 0.2592 3025.00 0.2278E‐01 525.00 0.2428 3050.00 0.2253E‐01 550.00 0.2281 3075.00 0.2228E‐01 575.00 0.2148 3100.00 0.2203E‐01 600.00 0.2029 3125.00 0.2179E‐01 625.00 0.1921 3150.00 0.2155E‐01 650.00 0.1823 3175.00 0.2132E‐01 675.00 0.1732 3200.00 0.2109E‐01 700.00 0.1649 3225.00 0.2087E‐01 725.00 0.1573 3250.00 0.2065E‐01 750.00 0.1502 3275.00 0.2043E‐01 775.00 0.1438 3300.00 0.2022E‐01 800.00 0.1378 3325.00 0.2002E‐01 825.00 0.1322 3350.00 0.1981E‐01 850.00 0.1269 3375.00 0.1961E‐01 875.00 0.1221 3400.00 0.1941E‐01 900.00 0.1175 3425.00 0.1922E‐01 925.00 0.1133 3450.00 0.1903E‐01 950.00 0.1093 3475.00 0.1884E‐01 975.00 0.1055 3500.00 0.1866E‐01 1000.00 0.1019 3525.00 0.1848E‐01 1025.00 0.9858E‐01 3550.00 0.1830E‐01 1050.00 0.9542E‐01 3575.00 0.1812E‐01 1075.00 0.9244E‐01 3600.00 0.1795E‐01 1100.00 0.8961E‐01 3625.00 0.1778E‐01 1125.00 0.8691E‐01 3650.00 0.1762E‐01 1150.00 0.8435E‐01 3675.00 0.1745E‐01 1175.00 0.8192E‐01 3700.00 0.1729E‐01 1200.00 0.7961E‐01 3725.00 0.1713E‐01 1225.00 0.7741E‐01 3750.00 0.1698E‐01 1250.00 0.7532E‐01 3775.00 0.1682E‐01 1275.00 0.7332E‐01 3800.00 0.1667E‐01 1300.00 0.7142E‐01 3825.00 0.1652E‐01 1325.00 0.6960E‐01 3850.00 0.1638E‐01 1350.00 0.6786E‐01 3875.00 0.1623E‐01 1375.00 0.6619E‐01 3900.00 0.1609E‐01 1400.00 0.6460E‐01 3925.00 0.1595E‐01 1425.00 0.6307E‐01 3950.00 0.1581E‐01 1450.00 0.6161E‐01 3975.00 0.1568E‐01 1475.00 0.6020E‐01 4000.00 0.1554E‐01 1500.00 0.5884E‐01 4025.00 0.1541E‐01 1525.00 0.5753E‐01 4050.00 0.1528E‐01 1550.00 0.5628E‐01 4075.00 0.1515E‐01 1575.00 0.5507E‐01 4100.00 0.1503E‐01 1600.00 0.5391E‐01 4125.00 0.1490E‐01 1625.00 0.5278E‐01 4150.00 0.1478E‐01 1650.00 0.5169E‐01 4175.00 0.1466E‐01 1675.00 0.5064E‐01 4200.00 0.1454E‐01 1700.00 0.4963E‐01 4225.00 0.1442E‐01 1725.00 0.4865E‐01 4250.00 0.1431E‐01 1750.00 0.4771E‐01 4275.00 0.1419E‐01 1775.00 0.4679E‐01 4300.00 0.1408E‐01 1800.00 0.4591E‐01 4325.00 0.1397E‐01 1825.00 0.4506E‐01 4350.00 0.1386E‐01 1850.00 0.4423E‐01 4375.00 0.1375E‐01 1875.01 0.4343E‐01 4400.00 0.1364E‐01 1900.00 0.4266E‐01 4425.00 0.1354E‐01 1924.99 0.4191E‐01 4450.00 0.1343E‐01 1950.00 0.4118E‐01 4475.00 0.1333E‐01 1975.00 0.4047E‐01 4500.00 0.1323E‐01 2000.00 0.3978E‐01 4525.00 0.1313E‐01 2025.00 0.3912E‐01 4550.00 0.1303E‐01 2050.00 0.3847E‐01 4575.00 0.1293E‐01 2075.00 0.3784E‐01 4600.00 0.1284E‐01 2100.00 0.3723E‐01 4625.00 0.1274E‐01 2125.00 0.3664E‐01 4650.00 0.1265E‐01 2150.00 0.3606E‐01 4675.00 0.1256E‐01 2175.00 0.3550E‐01 4700.00 0.1247E‐01 2200.00 0.3495E‐01 4725.00 0.1237E‐01 2225.00 0.3442E‐01 4750.00 0.1229E‐01 2250.00 0.3390E‐01 4775.00 0.1220E‐01 2275.00 0.3340E‐01 4800.00 0.1211E‐01 2300.00 0.3290E‐01 4825.00 0.1203E‐01 2325.00 0.3242E‐01 4850.00 0.1194E‐01 2350.00 0.3196E‐01 4875.00 0.1186E‐01 2375.00 0.3173E‐01 4900.00 0.1177E‐01 2400.00 0.3127E‐01 4925.00 0.1169E‐01 2425.00 0.3083E‐01 4950.00 0.1161E‐01 2450.00 0.3040E‐01 4975.00 0.1153E‐01 2475.00 0.2998E‐01 5000.00 0.1145E‐01 2500.00 0.2957E‐01 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********************** AERSCREEN MAXIMUM IMPACT SUMMARY ********************* ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 3‐hour, 8‐hour, and 24‐hour scaled concentrations are equal to the 1‐hour concentration as referenced in SCREENING PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE AIR QUALITY IMPACT OF STATIONARY SOURCES, REVISED (Section 4.5.4) Report number EPA‐454/R‐92‐019 http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance_permit.htm under Screening Guidance MAXIMUM SCALED SCALED SCALED SCALED 1‐HOUR 3‐HOUR 8‐HOUR 24‐HOUR ANNUAL CALCULATION CONC CONC CONC CONC CONC PROCEDURE (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ FLAT TERRAIN 1.823 1.823 1.823 1.823 N/A DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 128.00 meters IMPACT AT THE AMBIENT BOUNDARY 1.407 1.407 1.407 1.407 N/A DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 1.00 meters 2656 29th Street, Suite 201 Santa Monica, CA 90405 Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg. (949) 887-9013 mhagemann@swape.com Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization Investigation and Remediation Strategies Litigation Support and Testifying Expert Industrial Stormwater Compliance CEQA Review Education: M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984. B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982. Professional Certifications: California Professional Geologist California Certified Hydrogeologist Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner Professional Experience: Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation, stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE, Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. Positions Matt has held include: •Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present); •Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2104, 2017; •Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003); Attachment C 2 •Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004); •Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989– 1998); •Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000); •Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 – 1998); •Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995); •Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and •Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986). Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst: With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included: •Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever. •Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial facilities. •Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stormwater contamination. •Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. •Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. •Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. •Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells. •Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California. With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following: •Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. •Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation. •Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation. •Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. •Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York. 3 •Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi. •Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. •Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators. Executive Director: As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council. Hydrogeology: As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows: •Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater. •Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases. •Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum. At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui. As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following: •Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water. •Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted 4 public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation. • Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer. Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows: • Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements. • Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S. EPA legal counsel. • Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites. With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks: • Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park. • Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup. • Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup. • Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐ wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan. Policy: Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following: • Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies. • Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs. • Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific 5 principles into the policy‐making process. • Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents. Geology: With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows: • Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability. • Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection. • Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon. As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following: • Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling. • Conducted aquifer tests. • Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal. Teaching: From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels: • At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination. • Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin. Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017. Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations: Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon. Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S. EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California. Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao. Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee). 6 Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles. Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association. Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee). Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant. Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee. Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association. Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association. Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists. Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association. Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers. 7 Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report. Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water. Unpublished report. Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report. Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report. VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report. Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina. Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada. Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City. Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996. Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61. Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Ch ar ac te r i z a t i o n and Cl ean up a t Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater. Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐ contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 8 Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35. Other Experience: Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations, 2009‐2011. SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE 2656 29th Street, Suite 201 Santa Monica, California 90405 Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Mobil: (310) 795-2335 Office: (310) 452-5555 Fax: (310) 452-5550 Email: prosenfeld@swape.com Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 12 October 2022 Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist Education Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration. M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics. B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Focus on wastewater treatment. Professional Experience Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years of experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr. Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, industrial, military and agricultural sources, unconventional oil drilling operations, and locomotive and construction engines. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities. Dr. Rosenfeld has also successfully modeled exposure to contaminants distributed by water systems and via vapor intrusion. Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, creosote, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at sites and has testified as an expert witness on numerous cases involving exposure to soil, water and air contaminants from industrial, railroad, agricultural, and military sources. Attachment D Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 12 October 2022 Professional History: Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist Publications: Rosenfeld P. E., Spaeth K., Hallman R., Bressler R., Smith, G., (2022) Cancer Risk and Diesel Exhaust Exposure Among Railroad Workers. Water Air Soil Pollution. 233, 171. Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48 Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342 Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C., (2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632. Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing. Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing. Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL. Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125. Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46. Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing. Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 12 October 2022 Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327. Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255. Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527- 000530. Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197. Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357. Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater, Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344. Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food, Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science and Technology. 49(9),171-178. Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) 2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004. Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities, and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199. Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178. Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315. Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008. Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191. Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668. Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367. Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 12 October 2022 Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor. Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262. Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State. Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2). Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users Network, 7(1). Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources. Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California. Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California. Presentations: Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA. Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA. Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA. Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis, Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA. Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS) Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting , Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ. Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ. Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia. Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 12 October 2022 Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA. Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA. Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3- Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA. Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala, Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA. Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway. Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility . APHA 134 Annual Meeting & Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals. Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia, PA. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel, Irvine California. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals. International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland. Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland. Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 12 October 2022 Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust. Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona. Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ. Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners. Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California. Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL. Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona. Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California. Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California. Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain. Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain. Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration. Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington.. Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from Indianapolis, Maryland. Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California. Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Ocean Shores, California. Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California. Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington. Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 12 October 2022 Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington. Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington. Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington. Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California. Teaching Experience: UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science 100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on the health effects of environmental contaminants. National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks. National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites. California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design. UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation. University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability. U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10. Academic Grants Awarded: California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment. Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001. Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University. Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000. King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998. Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 12 October 2022 James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996. United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the Tahoe National Forest. 1995. Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts in West Indies. 1993 Deposition and/or Trial Testimony: In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Billy Wildrick, Plaintiff vs. BNSF Railway Company Case No. CIVDS1711810 Rosenfeld Deposition 10-17-2022 In the State Court of Bibb County, State of Georgia Richard Hutcherson, Plaintiff vs Norfolk Southern Railway Company Case No. 10-SCCV-092007 Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2022 In the Civil District Court of the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana Millard Clark, Plaintiff vs. Dixie Carriers, Inc. et al. Case No. 2020-03891 Rosenfeld Deposition 9-15-2022 In The Circuit Court of Livingston County, State of Missouri, Circuit Civil Division Shirley Ralls, Plaintiff vs. Canadian Pacific Railway and Soo Line Railroad Case No. 18-LV-CC0020 Rosenfeld Deposition 9-7-2022 In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jonny C. Daniels, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc. Case No. 20-CA-5502 Rosenfeld Deposition 9-1-2022 In The Circuit Court of St. Louis County, State of Missouri Kieth Luke et. al. Plaintiff vs. Monsanto Company et. al. Case No. 19SL-CC03191 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-25-2022 In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jeffery S. Lamotte, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc. Case No. NO. 20-CA-0049 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-22-2022 In State of Minnesota District Court, County of St. Louis Sixth Judicial District Greg Bean, Plaintiff vs. Soo Line Railroad Company Case No. 69-DU-CV-21-760 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-17-2022 In United States District Court Western District of Washington at Tacoma, Washington John D. Fitzgerald Plaintiff vs. BNSF Case No. 3:21-cv-05288-RJB Rosenfeld Deposition 8-11-2022 Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 12 October 2022 In Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Macon Illinois Rocky Bennyhoff Plaintiff vs. Norfolk Southern Case No. 20-L-56 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-3-2022 In Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County Ohio Joe Briggins Plaintiff vs. CSX Case No. A2004464 Rosenfeld Deposition 6-17-2022 In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Kern George LaFazia vs. BNSF Railway Company. Case No. BCV-19-103087 Rosenfeld Deposition 5-17-2022 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Bobby Earles vs. Penn Central et. al. Case No. 2020-L-000550 Rosenfeld Deposition 4-16-2022 In United States District Court Easter District of Florida Albert Hartman Plaintiff vs. Illinois Central Case No. 2:20-cv-1633 Rosenfeld Deposition 4-4-2022 In the Circuit Court of the 4th Judicial Circuit, in and For Duval County, Florida Barbara Steele vs. CSX Transportation Case No.16-219-Ca-008796 Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2022 In United States District Court Easter District of New York Romano et al. vs. Northrup Grumman Corporation Case No. 16-cv-5760 Rosenfeld Deposition 3-10-2022 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Linda Benjamin vs. Illinois Central Case No. No. 2019 L 007599 Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2022 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Donald Smith vs. Illinois Central Case No. No. 2019 L 003426 Rosenfeld Deposition 1-24-2022 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Jan Holeman vs. BNSF Case No. 2019 L 000675 Rosenfeld Deposition 1-18-2022 In the State Court of Bibb County State of Georgia Dwayne B. Garrett vs. Norfolk Southern Case No. 20-SCCV-091232 Rosenfeld Deposition 11-10-2021 Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 12 October 2022 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Joseph Ruepke vs. BNSF Case No. 2019 L 007730 Rosenfeld Deposition 11-5-2021 In the United States District Court For the District of Nebraska Steven Gillett vs. BNSF Case No. 4:20-cv-03120 Rosenfeld Deposition 10-28-2021 In the Montana Thirteenth District Court of Yellowstone County James Eadus vs. Soo Line Railroad and BNSF Case No. DV 19-1056 Rosenfeld Deposition 10-21-2021 In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al.cvs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc. Case No. 0i9-L-2295 Rosenfeld Deposition 5-14-2021 Trial October 8-4-2021 In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois Joseph Rafferty vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a AMTRAK, Case No. 18-L-6845 Rosenfeld Deposition 6-28-2021 In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois Theresa Romcoe vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA Rail Case No. 17-cv-8517 Rosenfeld Deposition 5-25-2021 In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa Mary Tryon et al. vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc. Case No. CV20127-094749 Rosenfeld Deposition 5-7-2021 In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division Robinson, Jeremy et al vs. CNA Insurance Company et al. Case No. 1:17-cv-000508 Rosenfeld Deposition 3-25-2021 In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company. Case No. 1720288 Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021 In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al. Case No. 18STCV01162 Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020 In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant. Case No. 1716-CV10006 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-30-2019 Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 11 of 12 October 2022 In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant. Case No. 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM Rosenfeld Deposition 6-7-2019 In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M/T Carla Maersk vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido” Defendant. Case No. 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237 Rosenfeld Deposition 5-9-2019 In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants Case No. BC615636 Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2019 In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants Case No. BC646857 Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19 In United States District Court For The District of Colorado Bells et al. Plaintiffs vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants Case No. 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018 In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No. 1923 Rosenfeld Deposition 11-17-2017 In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa Simons et al., Plaintifs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants Cause No. C12-01481 Rosenfeld Deposition 11-20-2017 In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295 Rosenfeld Deposition 8-23-2017 In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants Case No. 1:19-cv-00315-RHW Rosenfeld Deposition 4-22-2020 In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No. LC102019 (c/w BC582154) Rosenfeld Deposition 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018 In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM Rosenfeld Deposition July 2017 Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 12 of 12 October 2022 In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants Case No. 13-2-03987-5 Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017 Trial March 2017 In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants Case No. RG14711115 Rosenfeld Deposition September 2015 In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants Case No. LALA002187 Rosenfeld Deposition August 2015 In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al. Civil Action No. 14-C-30000 Rosenfeld Deposition June 2015 In The Iowa District Court for Muscatine County Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant Case No. 4980 Rosenfeld Deposition May 2015 In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant. Case No. CACE07030358 (26) Rosenfeld Deposition December 2014 In the County Court of Dallas County Texas Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant. Case No. cc-11-01650-E Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013 Rosenfeld Trial April 2014 In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987) Rosenfeld Deposition October 2012 In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant. Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM Rosenfeld Deposition July 2010, June 2011 In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076 Rosenfeld Deposition September 2010 In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants. Case No. 2:07CV1052 Rosenfeld Deposition July 2009 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1594 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT Appearance by Camilla Sutherland to discuss Roading Park resurface of the tennis courts start date. (District 3 Resident) Attachment: Request to speak before the Fresno City Council City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 NO SHOW From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Camilla Sutherland Monday, October 16, 2023 2:29 PM Clerk Agendas Request to Speak Before the Fresno City Council Follow up Completed External Email: Use caution with links and attach ments Name: Camilla Sutherland Address Fresno, California 93755 District District 3 Phone Email Date You Wish to Speak Before the City Council October 16, 2023 Topic/Subject Roeding Park resurface of the tennis courts. Start date IP Address 45.29.234.135 User-Agent (Browser/OS) Apple Safari 16.6 / OS X Referrer https://www.fresno.gov/cityclerk/ 1 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1489 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 5.-A. CLOSED SESSION ITEM November 2, 2023 SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case Name:Leonard Lujan v. City of Fresno, PSI, Admin by Tristar Risk Management; Tristar Claim No.: 1010103818-ADR-1 City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1510 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 5.-B. CLOSED SESSION ITEM November 2, 2023 SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) Case Name:Michael Brogdon v. City of Fresno, PSI, Admin by Tristar Risk Management; Tristar Claim No.: 1010104473-ADR-1 City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1513 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 5.-C. CLOSED SESSION ITEM November 2, 2023 SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1488 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 5.-D. CLOSED SESSION ITEM October 19, 2023 SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 23-1601 Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #: 5.-E. CLOSED SESSION ITEM SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(4): 1 potential case City of Fresno Printed on 10/27/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Agenda Date:11/2/2023 Agenda #:File #: ID 23-1603 5.-F. CLOSED SESSION ITEM SUBJECT CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(2): 2 potential cases City of Fresno Printed on 11/15/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11/02/2023 DISCUSSED NO REPORTS