Clovis City Council
October 17, 2022

October 17, 2022 - 1 - 7:05 PM A G E N D A • C I T Y C O U N C I L M E E T I N G

October 17, 2022 6:00 PM Council Chamber

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to access the City Council Chamber to participate at this meeting, please contact the City Clerk or General Services Director at (559) 324 -2060 (TTY – 711). Notificatio n 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the Council Chamber.

The Clovis City Council meetings are open to the public at the physical address listed above. There are numerous ways to participate in the City Council meetings: you are able to attend in person; you may submit written comments as described below; you may participate by calling in by phone (see “Verbal Comments” below); and you may view the meeting which is webcast and acces sed at www.cityofclovis.com/agendas.

Written Comments

 Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments at:
www.cityofclovis.com/agendas at least two (2) hours before the meeting (4:00 p.m.). You will be prompted to provide:

 Council Meeting Date
 Item Number
 Name
 Email
 Comment

 Please submit a separate form for each item you are commenting on.

 A copy of your written comment will be provided to the City Council noting the item number.

If you wish to make a verbal comment, please see instructions below.

 Please be aware that any written comments received that do not specify a particular agenda item will be marked for the general public comment portion of the agenda.

 If a written comment is received after 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting, efforts will be made to provide the comment to the City Council during the meeting. However, staff cannot guarantee that written comments received after 4:00 p.m. will be provided to City Council during the meeting. All written comments received prior to the end of the meeting will be made part of the record of proceedings.

Council Chamber, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 324-2060 www.cityofclovis.com
1 October 17, 2022 - 2 - 7:05 PM Verbal Comments

 If you wish to speak to the Council on an item by telephone, you should contact the City Clerk at (559) 324-2060 no later than 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.

 You will be asked to provide your name, phone number, and your email. You will be emailed instructions to log into Webex to participate in the meeting. Staff recommends participants log into the Webex at 5:30 p.m. the day of the meeting to perform an audio check.

 All callers will be placed on mute, and at the appropriate time for your comment your microphone will be unmuted.

 In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less, or 10 minutes per topic

Webex Participation

 Reasonable efforts will be made to allow written and verbal comment from a participant communicating with the host of the virtual meeting. To do so, a participant will need to chat with the host and request to make a written or verbal comment. The host w ill make reasonable efforts to make written and verbal comments available to the City Council. Due to the new untested format of these meetings, the City cannot guarantee that these written and verbal comments initiated via chat will occur. Participants desiring to make a verbal comment via chat will need to ensure that they accessed the meeting with audio transmission capabilities.

CALL TO ORDER

FLAG SALUTE - Councilmember Bessinger

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENTS - This is an opportunity for the members of the public to address the City Council on any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction that is not listed on the Agenda. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less, or 10 minutes per topic. Anyone wishing to be placed on the Agenda for a specific topic should contact the City Manager’s office and submit correspondence at least 10 days before the desired date of appearance.

ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS - With respect to the approval of resolutions and ordinances, the reading of the title shall be deemed a motion to waive a reading of the complete resolution or ordinance and unless there is a request by a Councilmember that the resolution or ordinance be read in full, furth er reading of the resolution or ordinance shall be deemed waived by unanimous consent of the Council.

CONSENT CALENDAR - Items considered routine in nature are to be placed upon the Consent Calendar. They will all be considered and voted upon in one vote as one item unless a Councilmember requests individual consideration. A Councilmember’s vote in favor of the Consent Calendar is considered and recorded as a separate affirmative vote in favor of each action listed. Motions in favor of adoption of the C onsent Calendar are deemed to include a motion to waive the reading of any ordinance or resolution on the Consent Calendar. For adoption of 2 October 17, 2022 - 3 - 7:05 PM ordinances, only those that have received a unanimous vote upon introduction are considered Consent items.

1. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the October 3, 2022, Council Meeting.

2. Finance - Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the 2022 -23 Budget to reapp ropriate carryover funding from the 2021-22 budget.

3. General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim on behalf of Dianne Smith.

4. General Services – Approval - Res. 22 -___, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to Adopt both an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and a Finance Business Systems Analyst Classification with a Salary Range of $8,514 to $10,349 per month for both positions; and Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan.

5. General Services – Approval – Res. 22-___, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to Adopt the Principal Utilities Engineer Classification with a Salary Range of $11,795 to $14,337 per month, and Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan.

6. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 17 -13 Nees Avenue Street Widening and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City.

7. Planning and Development Services - Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 21 -04, Loma Vista Village Green Offsite Improvements.

PUBLIC HEARINGS - A public hearing is an open consideration within a regular or special meeting of the City Council, for which special notice has been given and may be required. When a public hearing is continued, noticing of the adjourned item is required as per Government Code 54955.1.

8. Consider Various Actions Related to the Public Utilities Director Position:

a. Consider Introduction - Ord. 22-___, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Clovis amending Article 5 Department of Public Utilities, Sections 2.2.501 and 2.2.502, and adding sections 2.2.503 and 2.2.504 of Chapter 2.2 (Officers and Employees) of the Clovis Municipal Code Pertaining to the Department of Public Utilities and the Position of Public Utilities Director, and

b. Consider Approval - Res. 22-___, Authorizing Amendments to the Public Utilities Director Classification within the Public Utilities Department.

Staff: Lori Shively, Personnel/Risk Manager
Recommendation: Approve

9. Consider items related to the incorporation of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) into the General Plan Circulation Element. City of Clovis, applicant.

a. Consider Approval – Res. 22-___, A request to certify a supplemental environmental impact report, adopt findings of fact, and adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

3 October 17, 2022 - 4 - 7:05 PM b. Consider Approval – Res. 22-___, GPA2022-003, A request to amend the 2 014 General Plan to incorporate policy changes to the Circulation Element to incorporate provisions related to the vehicle miles traveled traffic impact evaluation criterion.

c. Consider Approval – Res. 22-___, A request to adopt updated transportation impact analysis guidelines.

Staff: Dave Merchen, City Planner
Recommendation: Approve

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS - Administrative Items are matters on the regular City Council Agenda other than Public Hearings.

10. Consider Approval – Implementation of Clovis Transit Program to Carry Narcan on Transit Vehicles.

Staff: Amy Hance, General Services Manager
Recommendation: Approve

COUNCIL ITEMS

11. Consider Update – Hotel Parking Ratios.

Staff: Dave Merchen, City Planner
Recommendation: Consider Update

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS

COUNCIL COMMENTS

ADJOURNMENT

MEETINGS AND KEY ISSUES

Regular City Council Meetings are held at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber. The following are future meeting dates:

Nov. 7, 2022 (Mon.)
Nov. 14, 2022 (Mon.)
Nov. 21, 2022 (Mon.) (To Be Cancelled)
Dec. 5, 2022 (Mon.)
Dec. 12, 2022 (Mon.)
Dec. 19, 2022 (Mon.)

4 PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

CLOVIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING

October 3, 2022 6:00 P.M. Council Chamber

Meeting called to order by Mayor Flores at 6:03
Flag Salute led by Councilmember Whalen

Roll Call: Present: Councilmembers Ashbeck, Mouanoutoua, Whalen Mayor Flores

Absent: Councilmember Bessinger

PUBLIC COMMENTS – 6:04

Steve Traveno , resident, shared concerns regarding increasing traffic Sunnyside and Fowler Avenues and the potential for accidents with pedestrians. He also expressed his disappointment that when he called the Police Department to report a man sleeping on the side of the road no one showed up.

Karen Taylor, resident, shared that she believed various statues in Old Town Clovis should be removed and commented on various subjects.

CONSENT CALENDAR – 6:15

Motion by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Whalen that the items on t he Consent Calendar be approved , including the waiver of the reading of the ordinance. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

1. Administration - Approved - Minutes from the September 12, 2022 and the September 19, 2022 Council Meetings.

2. Administration - Adopted - Ord. 22 -08, Rezone 2021 -001 and R2021 -003, A request to establish a Master Plan Community (MPC) Overlay District in conjunction with Home Place Master Plan and a request to prezone properties within the boundaries of the Home Place Master Plan to a combination of base zone districts to implement the land uses identified in the Home Place Master Plan. (Vote: 5-0)

3. Finance – Received and Filed – Investment Report for the Month of June 2022.

4. Finance – Received and Filed – Treasurer’s Report for the Month of June 2022.

5. General Services – Approved – Res. 22-110, Authorizing the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances for the FY 2022-23 California State Transit Assistance State of Good Repair Program.

6. General Services – Approved – Res. 22-111, Authorizing Amendments to the City Engineer Classification in the Planning and Development Services Department.

7. General Services – Approved – Res. 22 -112, Authorizing Amendments to the Lead Bus Driver Classification and Compensation Plan in the General Services Department.

8. Planning and Development Services - Approved – Res. 22-113, Annexation of Miscellaneous Properties to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

COUNCIL ITEMS – 6:18

6:18 – ITEM 10 - APPROVED APPOINTMENT – FRESNO COUNTY TRANSPORTAT ION AUTHORITY URBAN AT LARGE BOARD MEMBER.

Motion for approval by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Mouanoutoua. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – 6:21

6:21 – ITEM 9 - CONDUCT – AN APPEAL HEARING REGARDING TH E ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT SUSPENSION FO R THE PALACE NIGHTCL UB LOCATED AT 446 CL OVIS AVENUE, CLOVIS, CA 93612.

Cesar Lossley, Co-owner of The Palace, spoke in support of approving the appeal.

Jeremy Sylvas, Employee of The Palace, spoke in support of approving the appeal.

Claudia Lossley, Co-owner of The Palace, spoke in support of approving the appeal.

Motion to deny the appeal and uphold the suspension as recommended by the Police Chief by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Mouanoutoua. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

COUNCIL ITEMS – 8:17

8:17 – ITEM 11 - APPROVED – CHANGE OF COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE.

Motion for approval by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Whalen.

Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

8:18 – ITEM 12 - APPROVED - DRAFT LETTERS OF SUPPORT REQUESTING THE ABILITY

TO CONDUCT INTERVIEWS FOR THE GLOBAL ENTRY PROGRAM AT THE FRESNO YOSEMITE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.

Motion for approval by Councilmember Whalen, seconded by Councilmember Mouanoutoua. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS – 8:21

COUNCIL COMMENTS – 8:21

6 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

CLOSED SESSION – 8:26

8:26 – ITEM 13 - GOVERNMENT CODE SECT ION 54957.6 CONFEREN CE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS AGENCY D ESIGNATED REPRESENTA TIVES: JOHN HOLT, AN DREW HAUSSLER, SHONNA HAL TERMAN, SCOTT G. CRO SS EMPLOYEE ORGANIZA TION:

CLOVIS FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION

Mayor Flores adjourned the meeting of the Council to October 17, 2022

Meeting adjourned: 9:00 p.m.

______________________________ ________________________________ Mayor City Clerk
7 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: Finance - Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the 2022-23 Budget to reappropriate carryover funding from the 2021-22 budget.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Res. 22-___, Amendments to the 2022-23 Budget

2. Description of Projects

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council approve Resolution 22-___; Reappropriating certain Capital Projects, Services and Capital Outlays from 20 21-22 to 2022-23 by Fund and Department as shown in Attachment A of Attachment 1 to the Resolution and as described in Attachment 2.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During the budget process, estimates are made as to projects and services e xpected to be completed by year-end. For a variety of reasons, some of these projects and services are not completed by June 30 th. These unspent funds are available for reappropriation to the next year. T his request requires Council approval as it amends the next year’s budget.

These projects and services will be completed during the next year.

BACKGROUND
As part of the preparation of the 2022-23 Annual Budget, certain projects in the Community Investment Program, capital outlays and services in the operation budgets were estimated to be completed by June 30, 2022, or at least contracts awarded or purchase orders issued.

Because of unforeseen delays or planned postponements for the purpose of cost saving s, contracts or purchase orders were not awarded in Fiscal Year 20 21-22 as originally anticipated. Because these projects were expected to be completed in 20 21-22, they were not re-budgeted in 2022-23.

8 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Included on Attachment 2 is a description of the pro jects to be reappropriated from the various departments with the reason given by the department for the request for reappropriation.

FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated fund balances for the year-end 2021-22 included the anticipated expenditure of funds for these items. Since these items were not encumbered and the funds not expended, the year -end balances will be higher than expected. Sufficient resources are available to cover these expenditures.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
In order to complete the planned proj ects and procure the necessary items, it is necessary to reappropriate the items to Fiscal Year 2022-23 to provide the budget authorization.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
Purchase orders or contracts for the reappropriated items will be issued, in most cases, within ninety days.

Prepared by: Gina Daniels, Assistant Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
9 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION 22-__

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2022-23 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Clovis approved the 20 22-23 Budget on June 13, 2022; and

WHEREAS, some capital projects were not commenced and capital outlays and services were not purchased in 2021-22; and

WHEREAS, the 2022-23 Budget assumed that the items would be completed and no provision was made for said items in the 20 22-23 Budget and the Fund Balances were adjusted accordingly; and

WHEREAS, the ending June 30, 20 22. Fund Balances will be greater by the amount of those items not commenced or purchased in 2021-22; and

WHEREAS, the Council desires that the items be completed

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the City of Clovis amend the 2022-23 Budget as provided in Attachment A for the “Summary of Expenditures by Fund” and the “Summary of Expenditures by Department.”

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED: October 17, 2022

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

10 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

ATTACHMENT A

SUMMARY OF REVENUES BY DEPARTMENT

Department Amount
$ 0

Total Revenues by Department $ 0

SUMMARY OF REVENUES BY FUND
Fund Amount
General $ 0

Total Revenues by Fund $ 0

____________________________________________________

SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT

Department
Fire $ 144,500
City Manager 4,175,000
General Services 883,000
Public Utilities 5,606,500
Planning & Development Services 20,000
Capital Improvement 57,323,100

Total Expenditures by Department $ 68,152,100

SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY FUND

Fund Amount
General $ 169,500
General Services 16,449,300
Fleet 2,816,000
Refuse 300,500
Sewer Enterprise 2,175,000
Water Enterprise 290,000
Planning & Development Services 20,000
Sewer Construction-Enterprise 1,255,300
Park Improvement 8,940,300
Street Construction 24,254,900
Water Construction- Enterprise 4,558,000
Water Construction- Developer 5,693,500
Community Sanitation-Enterprise 1,229,800
Total Expenditures by Fund $ 68,152,100

11 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Total Revenue Reappropriations -$
Fire Department
Travel - Conferences Fire investigations training 28,500$ 61000 65001 Delay due to the Pandemic
Travel - Meetings Pre construction travel for new engine 18,000 61000 65002 Postponed by apparatus committee
Training Education Incentive Education Incentive 48,000 61000 65101 Delay in receiving grades
Training Classes & Seminar Education Incentive 22,000
61000 65102 New classes had to be scheduled
Training Classes & Seminar Protective Clothing 28,000
63000 65102 Classes postponed due to the Pandemic
Total Fire Department 144,500$
City Manager
Information Technology
Computer Programming Software/Cloud programming services 25,000$ 36200 63307 System evaluations in progress
Central Processors Enterprise Resourcce Planning/Utility Billing System 4,000,000 36200 68201 Postponed due to evaluation
High Speed Network Equipment End of Life Replacements 25,000 36200 68206 Delayed due to limited staff
CAD-Police Systems Enterprise Law Enforcement Mgt System upgrade 125,000 36200 68260 Product unavailable
Total City Manager Department 4,175,000$
General Services Department
Facilities
Building Repair - Miss Winkles Building Repair 6,500$
33300 63417 Limited staff availability
Building Repair - Recreation Tuff Shed 10,000
33300 63412 Limited staff availability
Expenditures
2021 - 2022 Reappropriations
Operations and Capital Improvement Program
Revenues
ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 of 8
12 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount General Services Department - Continued
Furnishings Station #3 commercial grade washer 10,000
33400 68103 Limited staff availability
Furnishings Station #1 & #5 Refrigerators 4,000
33400 68103 Limited staff availability
Furnishings Station #5 washer/dryer replacement 2,500
33400 68103 Limited staff availability
Safety Equipment Self-contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire 850,000 33400 68403 Limited staff availability
Total General Services Department 883,000$
Public Utilities Department
Street Maintenance
Signs and materials Purchase street signs N/A 25,000$
71000 64244 Backorder for signs
Fleet Capital
Patrol Vehicles Purchase patrol vehicles N/A 250,000
75100 68701 No vehicles available to purchase
Sedans & Wagons Purchase of new sedan 26,500
75100 68702 No vehicles available to purchase
Standard Pickup Purchase pickups 88,500
75100 68710 No vehicles available to purchase
Utility Trailer Trailer for Central Control Unit portable restrooms 17,000 75100 68716 Unable to purchase
Light Duty Truck 1-5 ton Purchase light duty trucks 353,000 75100 68720 No vehicles available to purchase
Heavy Duty Trucks-over 5 ton Truck Purchase 251,000
75100 68721 No vehicles available to purchase
Fire Trucks Fire truck build outs N/A 130,000
75100 68722 Unable to purchase
Refuse Trucks Purchase new trucks 1,700,000
75100 68724 Unable to purchase
Solid Waste
Repair & Maint Corp Yard Roofing & office improvements 75,000 76100 63459 Construction delay

13 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Public Utilities Department - Continued
Green waste Containers Purchase green waste containers 52,900 76100 68513 U
nable to purchase
Marketing Services Marketing Services 60,000
76100 63304 Project delay
Specialty Equipment Purchase specialty equipment 72,600 76100 68750 U
nable to purchase
Landfill Materials & Supplies Hauling of asphalt concrete grindings Bid 40,000 76200 64235 Project delay
Sewer
Sewer Plant & Facilities Operations & Maintenance increase N/A 100,000 76500 63314 Increased costs due to flow increase
Repair & Maint Corp Yard Roofing & office improvements 75,000 76500 63459 Construction delay
Plant and Trunk Capital Regional plant capital projects 2,000,000 76500 73015 Regional plant project delayed
Water
Repair & Maint Corp Yard Roofing & office improvements 75,000 77000 63459 Construction delay
Specialty Equipment Various specialty equipment 215,000 77000 68750 Unable to purchase
Total Public Utilities Department $ 5,606,500
Planning & Development Services
Consulting Services Affordable Housing Project/Strategy 20,000$ 74100 63301 Delay in finding provider
Total Planning & Development Services 20,000$
Community Investment Department
Government Facilities
Fire Station #2 - Training Facility Build temporary training building 363,000$ 90000 71058 In construction
Fire Station #2 Rebuild Rebuild the existing Fire Station 2 8,424,000 90000 71059 In design, not bid yet

14 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Government Facilities - Continued
Fire Station #4 - Remodel Kitchen Remodel 64,700
90000 71079 Limited staff availability
San Gabriel Park - Restroom Reroof Restroom reroof 50,000 90000 71087 In progress, no bid necessary
Landmark Square - Library District Civic Center North site improvements 957,100 90000 71324 In construction
Landmark Square - Senior Center Civic Center North site imprvmts/Senior Center 368,700 90000 71325 In construction
Senior Ctr Exterior Beam Replace Replace exterior beams on existing Senior Center 115,300 90000 71342 In design, not bid yet
Civic Center Landscape Design for City Hall/Civic Ctr Campus Improvements 118,400 90000 71361 In design, not bid yet
Civic Center ADA Improvements Civic Center American Disability Act Improvements 118,700 90000 71392 In design, not bid yet
Transit Station Construct new Transit Building 429,000
90000 71428 In construction
Fire Station #6 Fire Station #6 76,400
90000 71435 In construction
Fiber Optics Installation Miscellaneous fiber installations 30,000 90000 71450 In progress, no bid necessary
Public Safety Facility Flooring Repair Replace Flooring at Public Safety Bldg 35,000 90000 71453 In progress, no bid necessary
Old Town Streetscape Imprvmnts Add tree wells on Pollasky Avenue 17,900 90000 71460 In construction
Fiber Optic Install to Fire Station 6 Fiber Optic Installation to Fire Station 6 158,400 90000 71465 In construction
Letterman Park Irrigation System Replace Irrigation System 64,700 90000 75191 In design, not bid yet
Sewer Capital Projects - Developer Fund
Shaw Sewer Main-Dewolf to McCall Install Sewer main in Shaw (PhaseII) 395,600 92000 72141 In design, not bid yet
Pump Station E Pump Addition Add a pump at pump station E 378,000 92000 72597 In design, not bid yet
Shepherd/Willow Pump Station Design location of Shepherd/Willow Pump Station 50,000 92000 73205 In preliminary design only
Shaw Avenue Recycled Water Main Install Recycled water main in Shaw (Phase II) 131,700 92000 73376 In design, not bid yet

15 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Sewer Capital Projects - Developer Fund - Continued
Nees Sewer Main-Minnewawa/Clovis Install Sewer main in Nees Avenue 300,000 92000 73377 In design, not bid yet
Park Improvements
SR168/Enterprise Canal Bridge Pedestrian Bridge over SR168/ Enterprise Canal 790,800 93000 74980 In design only
Misc Developer Park Projects Reimburse developer park construction 518,500 93000 75015 In progress
Loma Vista Village Green Construct Village Green Park in Loma Vista 7,631,000 93000 75635 In construction
Street Improvements
Clovis Avenue Streetscape Hardscape Improvements on Clovis Avenue 243,800 95000 71461 In construction
Plan Lines Create Plan lines for area North of Shepherd 40,000 95000 74007 In design only
Lane Reduction study Various lane reduction surveys 29,000 95000 74019 In design only
Preventive Maintenance Slurry seal on local streets 30,000 95000 74020 In construction - Measure C funded
Shaw - DeWolf to McCall Street widening and signals 7,378,200 95000 74057 In design, not bid yet - Regional Measure C funded Minnewawa - Alluvial to Herndon Street Widening 556,900 95000 74059 In design - Regional Surface Transportation Program funded
Gettysburg/Norwich Alley Alley rehabilitation 199,500
95000 74101 In design, not bid yet - Community
Development Block Grant funded
Villa - Barstow to Shaw Street rehabilitation 912,000
95000 74132 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded
Bullard - Minnewawa to DeWitt Rule 20 13,000
95000 74151 In design only
Herndon - Temperance to DeWolf Street widening & signals 6,255,500 95000 74184 In design - Regional Measure C funded
Miscellaneous Concrete Repairs Miscellaneous improvements at various locations 388,000 95000 74210 In progress
Miscellaneous Construction Repairs Miscellaneous improvements at various locations 199,000 95000 74215 In progress

16 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Street Improvements - Continued
Nees - Minnewawa to Clovis Street Widening 1,770,700
95000 74508 In design - Regional Service Transportation Program funded
Trail Pavement Maintenance Maintenance on areas of the trail system 250,000 95000 74561 In design, not bid yet
Local Street ADA ramps America Disability Act improvements-City ramps 200,000 95000 74567 In design, not bid yet
Ashlan - West of Leonard Street Widening 321,000
95000 74568 In design, no bid necessary
Shepherd/Peach Intersection Install traffic signal at the intersection 63,000 95000 74584 In design - Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality funded
Nees/Armstrong Intersection Install traffic signal at the intersection 43,000 95000 74585 In design - Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality funded
Alleys - SW of Pollasky/Mitchell Alley rehabilitation 757,200 95000 74586 In design/Community Development Block Grant funded Horizontal Control System Survey city horizontal control system 20,000 95000 74587 In design only
Shepherd Signal Interconnect Signal Interconnect 128,900 95000 74595 In design - Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality funded
Armstrong - Alluvial to Nees Street rehabilitation 64,600 95000 74691 In design - Measure C funded
Shaw - Armstrong to Temperance Street rehabilitation 24,000 95000 74844 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded
Sunnyside Widening - Third to Fifth Street Widening 64,000 95000 74966 In design - Measure C funded
Ped Push Button Upgrade ADA improvements at various City intersections 31,500 95000 74972 In construction - Highway Safety Improvement funded Vehicle Video Detection Replacement Traffic Signal Improvements at various locations 940,500 95000 74973 In construction - Measure C funded
Pavement Management System Development of the pavement management system 38,000 95000 74975 Coordinate with other projects
Bullard - Armstrong to Temperance Street rehabilitation 770,600 95000 74979 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded

17 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Street Improvements - Continued
Armstrong - Tollhouse to Sierra Street rehabilitation 913,000 95000 74981 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded
Barstow - Villa to Minnewawa Street rehabilitation 43,000 95000 74991 In design - Senate Bill 1 funded
Sierra - Willow to Peach Traffic Signal Improvements at various locations 16,000 95000 74993 In design - Measure C funded
Sunnyside - Fifth to Barstow Traffic Signal Improvements at various locations 14,000 95000 74994 In design - Measure C funded
Local Street Improvements Slurry seal local streets 500,000 95000 74995 In progress - Measure C funded
Villa - Barstow to Bullard Street rehabilitation 966,000 95000 74998 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded
Barstow - Minnewawa to Clovis Street rehabilitation 71,000 95000 74999 In construction/Surface Transportation Block Grant funded
Water Capital Projects - Enterprise Fund
79 N. Sunnyside Tenant Improvement Tenant Improvements at new Public Utilities building 86,000 96000 72631 In construction
Recharge Facility Locate a recharge site 50,000
96000 77501 Limited staff availability
Aquifer Storage Recovery Recharge alternative 50,000
96000 77502 Limited staff availability
SWTP - High Service Pumps VFD Add pumps at Surface Water Treatment Plant 1,374,000 96000 77503 Limited staff availability
Santa Ana/Clovis Water Main Modify water mains in the intersection 240,000 96000 77504 Limited staff availability
SWTP Pretreatment Pretreatment Process 1,465,000
96000 77528 Limited staff availability
SWTP Process Addition Addition to the treatment process 30,000 96000 77531 Limited staff availability
Well 18 GAC Granuar Activated Carbon at well 18 609,000 96000 77573 Limited staff availability
Well 35 Drill and Develop well site 654,000
96000 77600 In construction
Water Capital Projects - Developer
SWTP Expansion Increase capacity of the plant 200,000
97000 77529 Limited staff availability

18 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Department/Account Number Description and Explanation Bid Status Amount Water Capital Projects - Developer - Continued
SWTP Process Addition Addition to the treatment process 10,000 97000 77531 Limited staff availability
SWTP Storage Tank Addition Additional tank/Surface Water Treatment Plant 200,000 97000 77532 Limited staff availability
Northeast SWTP Develop northeast Surface Water Treatment Plant 100,000 97000 77536 Limited staff availability
Shaw Avenue Water Main Install Water Main in Shaw Ave - DeWolf to McCall 328,100 97000 77539 In design, not bid yet
Well 34 Aux Power Generator at well Site 34 101,000
97000 77587 In design, no bid necessary
Water Development Secure Water to serve areas w/in the General Plan 300,000 97000 77725 In progress
Northern Water Intertie Connection of Wtr Main to City of Fresno at Willow 425,000 97000 77750 Limited staff availability
Water Storage Reservoir #9 Property Acquisition for Reservoir site in NW area 2,342,000 97000 78045 In progress
Water Storage Reservoir #10 Property Acquisition for Reservoir site in NW area 1,687,400 97000 78050 In progress
Community Sanitation Improvements - Enterprise Fund
79 N. Sunnyside Tenant Improvement Tenant Improvements at new Public Utilities building 85,700 99500 72631 In construction
Landfill Entrance Construct left turn lane into landfill entrance 63,100 99500 81125 In construction
Landfill Electric Power Extension of power to west end of property 175,000 99500 81170 Limited staff availability
Solid Waste Facility Expansion Acquire and construct a Refuse Satellite Facility 771,000 99500 81205 Limited staff availability
Landfill Solar Install Solar panels 100,000
99500 81211 Limited staff availability
Landfill Flare Upgrade Flare at the landfill 35,000
99500 81212 Limited staff availability
Total Community Investment Program Department 57,323,100$ Total Expenditure Reappropriations = $ 68,152,100

19 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim on behalf of Dianne Smith.

ATTACHMENTS: None

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None

RECOMMENDATION
Reject the General Liability Claim filed on behalf of Dianne Smith.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On behalf of Dianne Smith (claimant), a General Liability Claim against the City of Clovis was filed on September 6, 2022, regarding a sidewalk causing a dangerous condition resulting in a trip and fall. Ms. Smith claims that she sustained bodily injuries and seeks reimbursement for medical expenses, loss of income, and future income. It is recommended that the claim be rejected at this time.

BACKGROUND
On September 6, 2022, a General Liability Claim was filed against the City of Clovis on behalf of Ms. Dianne Smith. The claim was legally sufficient and timely. On March 17, 2022, Ms. Smith alleges the City failed to adequately maintain the sidewalk located near 1532 North Sanders Avenue, Clovis, which created a dangerous and/hazardous condition. Ms. Smith sustained injuries to her pelvis, hip, back, and right knee.

Ms. Smith’s seeks damages for her medical expenses in an amount in excess of $25,000. The claim has been filed as a “civil unlimited case”.

FISCAL IMPACT
Rejection of the claim does not result in any fiscal impact.

20 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the claim be rejected. The City is not liable for this claim. In addition, by rejecting this claim, the time in which lawsuits may be filed against the City will begin to run.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
A letter will be sent to the claimant informing Ms. Smith that the claim has been rejected.

Prepared by: Charles W. Johnson, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: City Manager JH

21 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: General Services – Approval - Res. 22-___, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to Adopt both an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and a Finance Business Systems Analyst Classification with a Salary Range of $8,514 to $10,349 per month for both positions; and Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 22-___ Classification and Compensation Plan

2. Resolution 22-___ Position Allocation Plan

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

RECOMMENDATION
For City Council to approve a resolution authorizing amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans by adopting both an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and a Finance Business Systems Analyst Classification with a Salary Range of $8,514 to $10,349 per month for both positions , and approve a resolution amending the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City has a need to add both an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and a Finance Business Systems Analyst classification. The proposed Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and the Finance Business Systems Analyst will be assigned to the City Manager Department. Over the last few years cyber security incidents have increased and caused several issues worldwide. There is a need to have an employee that will be dedicated to cybersecurity.

The proposed Finance Business Systems Analyst will be responsible for performing the journey- level technical planning, implementation, and maintenance efforts related to the new financial enterprise software and utility billing system s. Adequate funds were included in the adopted FY22-23 budget for both new classifications. Modification of the City’s Classification, Compensation, and Position Allocation Plans require the City Council’s approval.

BACKGROUND
During the FY 2 2-23 budget process, the City Manager Department determined the need to create an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and a Finance Business Systems Analyst classification. These positions were added to the City Manager Department FY 22-23 22 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

Position Allocation Plan but now requires each classification in order to recruit for and fill both positions.

With the increase in cyber security incidents worldwide there have been numerous ransomware attacks on many local government agencies. Unfortunately, it is no longer a matter of “if” the City will be targeted or breached, it is no w a matter of when that will happe n. The proposed Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst classification will be responsible for deploying technology throughout the City network to create a multi -layered defense. The incumbent will be responsible for proactively installing operating system updates and security patches on all enterprise equipment. This position will also educate and provide cyber security awareness to all City staff.

Staff is also proposing that the Finance Business Systems Analyst classification be added to reflect the new responsibilities and job duties that will be required in the City Manager Department. This classification will assist with the implementation of the new utility billing software and finance system. Th e incumbent will also perform lead responsibilities on an on - going basis for assigned subsystems and the utility billing systems, including the annual project improvements, staff training, and system maintenance. The Finance Business Systems Analyst will work collaboratively with the Information Technology Division on software implementation and the ongoing testing, and system upgrades that the new software will require on a continuous basis.

The recommended salary range for both the Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and the Finance Business Systems Analyst will be $ 8,514 to $ 10,349. Both the Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and the Finance Business Systems Analyst will be assigned to the Confidential Technical and Financial Professionals Association (CTFP) bargaining unit for employee representation. The impact of each of these new classifications has been reviewed with the Confidential Technical and Financial Professionals Association unit representatives and they are in agreement with adding the new classifications.

FISCAL IMPACT
During the budget process, placeholder positions of one Senior Information Technology Analyst and one Business Systems Analyst were in the 2022 -23 budget. Those positions will be converted to the new positio ns with no additional impact to the FY 2022-23 City Manager Department budget allocation.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Creation of each of these classifications is necessary in order to meet the needs within the City Manager Department. The recommended changes to the City’s Classification, Compensation, and Position Allocation Plans require Council approval.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
Personnel staff will add the new classification description s to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans. The po sition allocation in the City Manager Department will be modified as noted in Attachment A of Attachment 2.

Prepared by: Lori Shively, Personnel/Risk Manager

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
23 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 22-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLANS BY

ADOPTING THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CYBERSECURITY ANALYST AND

ADOPTING THE FINANCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST CLASSIFICATIONS IN THE

CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the City has a need for an Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst classification to provide the necessary support to assist with City cyber security; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the City has a need for a Finance Business Systems Analyst classification to assist with the implementation of the new financial enterprise software and utility billing systems; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is appropriate to assign both the Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst and Finance Business Systems Analyst classifications to the Clovis Confidential Technical and Financial Professionals (CTFP) for representation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESO LVED, that the City of Clovis shall modify the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to include the Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst (Attachment A) and the Finance Business Systems Analyst classifications (Attachment B) with a monthly salary range of $8,514 to $10,349.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED: October 17, 2022

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk
24 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

ATTACHMENT A

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CYBERSECURITY ANALYST
$8,514 to $10,349 Monthly Salary

DEFINITION
Under general supervision perform a variety of professional level work including the design, implementation, maintenance, evaluation, and daily management of security systems and solutions; and perform duties related to threat detection and prevention, education, risk assessment, compliance, governance, business recovery, forensics, incident response and perform related duties as required.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
Reporting to the Deputy Director of Technology, the Information Technology Cybers ecurity Analyst maintains and administers the operational and technical aspects of the City’s security information event and vulnerability management systems . This advanced le vel classification conducts risk assessments, evaluates security vulnerabilities, and monitors and analyzes City systems to identify priority mitigations. The incumbent provides assistance and training to City staff to correct identified security vulnerab ilities and implement priority security protocols ; assists in developing programs to ensure City compliance with regulatory, security, and privacy standards adopted by the City. Instructions given by the supervisor generally do not provide all of the infor mation needed to complete an assignment. Incumbents are expected to resolve most problems confronted through the application of industry best practices, technical knowledge, judgment, and precedent; referring to the supervisor only those problems which involve the establishment of new procedures or which involve solutions which are inconsistent with departmental procedures and policies. The incumbent has some independence in selecting work methods or procedures.

EXAMPLE OF DUTIES
Implement, monitor, maintain, and troubleshoot various security systems that protect the City’s networks, systems, applications and critical infrastructure. Implement timely solutions to security issues adversely affecting confidentiality, integrity and/or availability of City s ystems and data. Analyze security alerts and event data to identify potential security incidents, threats, mitigations, and vulnerabilities. Facilitate cyber security training and security awareness programs. Perform risk assessments and execute tests of network and information systems to ensure technology processes are secure; stay up to date on evolving security threats and trends; regularly review security alerts and reports from Federal, State and commercial security sources. Establish protocols to pr otect digital files and information systems against unauthorized access, modification, and/or destruction. Plan and conduct internal and external cyber security audits, interpret and document audit results and recommend corrective actions.

Incumbents in this class may provide lead direction to other team members but do not possess supervisory responsibilities. Perform related work as required. 25 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

TYPICAL QUALIFICATIONS

LICENSE REQUIRED
 Possession of a valid and appropriate California Driver's License and a good driving record.

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
Education:
 Bachelor's Degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in Information Security, Computer Science, Information Technology , Business Administration, or a closely related field.

AND

Experience:
 Four (4) years of progressively responsible information technology experience, preferably in I nformation Security, including vulnerability management, SIEM administration, and/or incident response responsibilities.

Certifications Desirable:
 CISSP
 GSEC
 Security+
 CISM

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
 NIST 800 -series cyber security standards, CIS Top -20 Critical Security Controls, Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI -DSS), and Criminal Justice Information Security (CJIS) requirements;
 Principles and practices of securing cloud-hosted systems and applications;  Principles and practices of complex operating system design, analysis, and documentation;
 Current hacker techniques, exploits, active defense detection and prevention measures, penetration testing tools, tactics, techniques, and procedures;  Information security frameworks, incident response and management, application security best practices and operations;
 Unified threat management (UTM) firewalls and associated components including, but not limited to, URL/Content filtering, file scan ning and blocking, and data leakage prevention;
 SSL Certificates and Encryption Key Lifecycle Management;  Endpoint detection and response (EDR) platform deployment, monitoring and management;
 Business continuity planning, documentation, and testing best practices;  Computer and network forensic tools, techniques and analysis including root cause and comprehensive cause and effect analysis of cyber attacks and breaches; 26 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

 One or more scripting languages, e.g. PowerShell, Python, BASH, etc.

Ability to:
 Analyze data communications, networks, hardware and software problems and determine feasible solutions;
 Manage security-related projects, investigations, operations and incident response;  Identify and document observed risks, threats and vulnerabilities and propose practical steps to minimize or mitigate them.
 Perform and/or work with service providers to conduct risk assessments ethical hacking/penetration testing against city systems
 Conduct cyber-security awareness training, campaigns, and testing  Communicate effectively orally and in writing;
 Develop and implement operational policies and procedures;  Establish and maintain effective working relationships with co-workers, representatives of user departments, outside agencies, and the public;
 Maintain the confidentiality of privileged information;  Operate a vehicle observing legal and defensive driving practices;  Prepare clear, accurate, and concise reports and records.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

PHYSICAL DEMANDS AND WORKING CONDITIONS
 Strength: Light work-lifting, caring and/pushing 25 pounds maximum with frequent lifting and/or carrying of objects weighing up to 25 pounds;  Positions in this class may be designated as confidential under Meyers-Millas Brown Act.
27 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

ATTACHMENT B

FINANCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST
$8,514 to $10,349 Monthly Salary

DEFINITION
Under general supervision provide a wide range of professional and technical support services in implementing, integrating, troubleshooting, and maintaining the City’s financial enterprise and utility billing software systems and perform related duties as required.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This single position journey-level class will provide a wide range of advanced professional and technical support services related to the City’s financial and ut ility billing systems and related workflows. The position partners with the Information Technology Division (IT) and key staff from other City Departments for planning, implementation, and maintenance efforts related to the financial enterprise software and utility billing systems. Instructions given by the supervisor generally do not provide all of the information needed to complete an assignment. The incumbent is expected to resolve most problems confronted through the application of technical knowledge, judgment, and precedent, referring to the supervisor only those problems which involve the establishment of new procedures, or which involve solutions which are inconsistent with departmental procedures and policies. The incumbent has some independence in selecting work methods or procedures.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES
Serve as business lead and subject matter expert in department business processes for the implementation of new or revised financial enterprise software and utility billing systems, along with their related processes and procedures. Support and/or develop financial reports while also assisting in analyzing financial reporting requirements. Identify and design process improvements in relationship to financial systems, as well as related workflow proce sses and approvals. Provide project leadership, configuration management, testing, and support for assigned financial subsystems. Develop implementation, maintenance, and communication plans. Draft or revise related policies and procedures. Perform lead re sponsibilities on an on- going basis for assigned financial subsystems and utility billing systems, including annual project improvements and maintenance. Train existing and new staff from all City departments on financial systems.

Provide configuration management for financial and utility billing systems. Provide support for configuration changes, workflow changes, and other system process modifications. Participate in change management control of financial and utility billing systems. Work with IT Division to control access to financial systems data. Provide support of financial and utility billing systems through the IT Services Help Desk. Develop, plan, and lead staff on the testing and implementation of system upgrades and modifications. Work with the In formation Technology staff and system vendors to identify and implement upgrades. Assure modifications and upgrades are successfully tested before implementation to the live environment. Report systems issues to the systems vendors and work with vendors to resolve the issues. Document 28 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

processes and results. Utilize standard reporting tools to write, maintain and support a variety of reports or queries. Help maintain data integrity in systems by running queries and analyzing data. Develop standard reports fo r ongoing customer needs and ad hoc queries as needed, working with staff to identify information requirements. Work with Information Technology staff to resolve complex reporting issues. Perform related work as required.

TYPICAL QUALIFICATIONS

LICENSE REQUIRED
 Possession of a valid and appropriate California Driver's License and a good driving record.

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
Education:
 Bachelor's Degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in in accounting, finance, information technology, or business administration, or a closely related field.

AND
Experience:
 Four (4) years of progressively responsible experience in accounting systems support including implementation, maintenance, configuration, or utilization in an enterprise environment, preferably in a municipal environment.

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
 Complex systems project management including planning, scheduling, monitoring and problem solving;
 Governmental accounting and auditing practices and principles;  Municipal finance policies, procedures, and operating guidelines;  Operation and configuration of financial software and utility billing systems in a municipal setting;
 Relevant city, county, state and federal laws and regulations;  Research methods, data collection and sampling techniques, and statistical analysis.

Ability to:
 Test and configure complex financial systems consistent with business needs of the City;  Understand and interpret financial and utility billing systems requirements from both a business and a technical perspective;
 Communicate business issues and goals with employees at all levels of the organization;  Configure, change, and test financial and utility billing software and related systems based on business needs of the City;
 Recommend business configurations based on knowledge of financial and utility billing systems and City goals;
29 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

 Understand and interpret workflow processes within a complex organization;  Diagnose and resolve systems analysis problems, evaluate alternatives and make sound independent decisions within established guidelines;
 Utilize a variety of spreadsheets, analytical tools, and other computer software for testing analysis and preparation of reports for management as requested;  Collect, compile, and analyze complex information and data;  Prepare, write, and present clear, accurate, and concise analytical reports and systems analysis to diverse groups;
 Work independently with minimal direction;
 Communicate effectively orally and in writing;
 Develop and implement operational policies and procedures;  Establish and maintain effective working relationships with co -workers, representatives of user departments, outside agencies, and the public;
 Maintain the confidentiality of privileged information;  Operate a vehicle observing legal and defensive driving practices.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

PHYSICAL DEMANDS AND WORKING CONDITIONS
 Strength: Light work-lifting, caring and/pushing 25 pounds maximum with frequent lifting and/or carrying of objects weighing up to 25 pounds;
 Positions in this class may be designated as confidential under Meyers-Millas Brown Act.

30 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 22-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE
CITY’S FY 22-23 POSITION ALLOCATION PLAN

WHEREAS, the FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan in the City Manager Department that was approved as part of the FY 22-23 City budget adoption process included placeholder positions for ne Senior Information Technology Analyst, and one Business Systems Analyst position; and

WHEREAS, a review of the staffing needs of the City indicates that converting one Senior Information Technology Analyst to one newly created classification of Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst is necessary in order to provi de the needed capacity to cover cyber security threats within the City; and

WHEREAS, a review of the staffing needs of the City indicates that converting one Business Systems Analyst to one newly created classification of Finance Business Systems Analyst is necessary to provide support for the planning, implementation, and maintenance efforts related to the new financial enterprise software and utility billing systems; and

WHEREAS, amending the City’s adopted FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan requires Cit y Council authorization.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Ci ty of Clovis that the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan shall be amended as noted in Attachment A.

* * * * *

The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED: October 17, 2022

___________________________ __________________________ Mayor City Clerk
31 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

ATTACHMENT A

POSITION ALLOCATION ADJUSTMENT BY DEPARTMENT FY 22-23

DEPARTMENT NUMBER OF POSITIONS

City Manager Department

Add: Information Technology Cybersecurity Analyst 1.0

Delete: Senior Information Technology Analyst 1.0

Add: Finance Business Systems Analyst 1.0

Delete: Business Systems Analyst 1.0

32 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: General Services – Approval – Res. 22-___, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to Adopt the Principal Utilities Engineer Classification with a Salary Range of $11,795 to $14,337 per month, and Approval – Res. 22-___, Amending the City’s FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 22-___ Classification and Compensation Plan

2. Resolution 22-___ Position Allocation plan

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None

RECOMMENDATION
For City Council to approve a resolution authorizing amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans by adopting the Principal Utilities Engineer Classification with a Salary Range of $11,795 to $14,337 per month, and approve a resolution amending the City’s FY 22- 23 Position Allocation Plan.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Public Utilities Department has a need to add a Principal Utilities Engineer classification.

The proposed classification will be responsible for performing managerial level work associated with City public utilities projects, construction inspection, and long-range planning. Following the evaluation of work assignments within the P ublic Utilities Department, a Principal Utilities Engineer position is requested to be added to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans and the FY 22-23 budget so recruitment for the position may occur. Modification of the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans requires the City Council’s approval.

BACKGROUND
The Public Utilities Department has determined the need to create a Principal Utilities Engineer classification. Staff is requesting that one (1) Principal Utilities Engineer position be added to the Public Utilities Department FY 2 2-23 Position Allocation Plan in order to recruit for and fill the position.

33 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

Staff is proposing that the Principal Utilities Engineer classification be added to reflect the responsibilities and job duties that are required in the Public Utilities Department. This position will report to the Public Utilities Director. The incumbent will be responsible for performing the most complex professional engineering work, supervising personnel, and directing technical operations for the Public Utilities Department.

It is recommended that the salary range for the Principal Utilities Engineer be placed between the City Engineer and Supervising Civil Engineer management positions as this position will have a high level of responsibility as the primary Engineer for the Public Utilities Department .

The recommended new salary range would be $ 11,795 to $14,337 per month. The Principal Utilities Engineer will be assigned to the management group. The new classification and salary range reflect the current needs of the City.

FISCAL IMPACT
The salary and related benefit costs of this proposed classification for the remainder of the fiscal year would be approximately an additional $ 122,000. The additional costs can be absorbed in the FY 2 2-23 Public Utilities Department budget as the Public Utilities Department h as salary savings from current unfilled positions.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Creation and addition of the Principal Utilities Engineer classification to the City’s classification and compensation plans provides a detailed classification description and allows for the recruitment of the new position. Modification of the City’s classification and compensation plans requires City Council approval.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
Personnel staff will update the City’s classification and compensation plans with the addition of the Principal Utilities Engineer.

Prepared by: Lori Shively, Personnel/Risk Manager

Reviewed by: City Manager JH

34 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

RESOLUTION 22-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLANS BY

ADOPTING A PRINCIPAL UTILITIES ENGINEER CLASSIFICATION IN THE PUBLIC

UTILITIES DEPARTMENT

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the City has a need for a Principal Utilities Engineer classification to provide the necessary support to the Public Utilities Department; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the appropriate salary range for the Principal Utilities Engineer classification is $11,795 to $14,337 per month; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is appropriate to assign the Principal Utilities Engineer classification to the Management Group.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the City of Clovis will modify the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to include the Principal Utilities Engineer classification (Attachment A) with a monthly salary range of $11,795 to $14,337.

* * * * *

The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Dated: October 17, 2022

___________________________ __________________________ Mayor City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 1
35 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

CITY OF CLOVIS

PRINCIPAL UTILITIES ENGINEER
Monthly Salary: $11,795 to $14,337

DEFINITION
Under general direction, plan, organize and direct the work of assigned operations of the Public Utilities Department; advise the Public Utilities Director, Assistant Public Utilities Directors, City Engineer and the Director of Planning and Development Se rvices regarding maintenance, operations, engineering, construction inspection, and City public utilities projects and activities; perform the most complex professional engineering work of the Public Utilities Department and perform related work as required.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
Reporting to the Public Utilities Director, the Principal Utilities Engineer is a managerial level class in the Public Utilities Department. The incumbent is responsible to the Public Utilities Director and coordinates with the City Engineer for advice and consultation on engineering matters and for the efficient operation of a division comprised of operations and maintenance, technical services, administration, City public utilities projects, construction inspection, and long-range planning. The Principal Utilities Engineer receives authority from the Public Utilities Director and functions as the engineer of record for Public Utilities. The Principal Utilities Engineer exercises supervision over other managerial employees an d personnel making assignments, setting priorities, training, and reviewing work. The incumbent is responsible for preparing performance evaluations, processing employee grievances, recommending employment, and for taking and recommending disciplinary action. Positions in this class act with a high degree of independence of action in the assigned area of responsibility. Direction received consists of the assignment of the responsibility to attain objectives according to policy guidelines, department, and city objectives. Incumbents are expected to develop methods and procedures and solve problems encountered. Except where a deviation in policy is involved, most work is not reviewed directly by a supervisor, and when work is reviewed, the review is directed toward final outcomes and results.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES
Plan, organize, and control activities in the Public Utilities Department as assigned by the Public Utilities Director and coordinate engineering matters with the City Engineer; supervise assignments of managers in the utilities and maintenance sections; participate in evaluating the need for and help develop plans and schedules for long-range public works and utilities programs; compile estimates, contract provisions and specifications; negotiate agreements with consultants, engineers, property owners, contractors, and other agencies for project and program delivery, rights -of-way, easements and financial participation; confer with Division and Department staff, other departments, and vario us public groups on maintenance operations, projects and improvements; confer with subordinates on the construction or rehabilitation of new and existing public works facilities; confer and negotiate with consultants and private engineering firms; provide direction on problems of design, materials and processes proposed in connection with new construction or major repairs; prepare ordinances for Council consideration; participate in the selection of new employees;

ATTACHMENT A
36 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

recommend and approve improvement plans for City public utilities projects; inspect and approve City public utility and maintenance improvements on behalf of the Public Utilities Department; may participate in traffic studies and recommend improvement of traffic control devices; represent the City in relations with other governmental agencies; conduct and assign field inspections; participate in the development and administration of the Division budget, and the Public Utilities Department budget; prepare and conduct performance evaluations; explain policies, procedures and objectives of the division to staff by written directive and by oral communications; conduct staff and public information meetings; and perform related work as required.

TYPICAL QUALIFICATIONS

LICENSE REQUIRED
 Possession of a valid appropriate California Driver's License and a good driving record.  Possession of current and valid Civil Engineer license from the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
Education:
 Graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering or a closely related field. A master’s degree is desirable.

And

Experience:
 A minimum of five (5) years of increasingly responsible professional civil engineering and administrative experience, with at least two (2) years in a supervisory or administrative capacity in municipal or county government.

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
 Technical, legal, financial and public relations problems involved in the conduct of municipal engineering programs;
 Methods of preparing designs, plans, specifications, estimates, reports and recommendations relating to proposed municipal and public works facilities;  Federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to municipal works and engineering;
 Principles of supervision and training;
 Principles of budgeting and financial management;
 Engineering principles and practices as applied to the field of municipal government;  Knowledge of traffic engineering;
 Appropriate safety precautions and procedures.

37 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

Ability to:
 Prepare comprehensive and complex technical reports;
 Establish and maintain effective working relationships with subordinates, public groups and organizations, City officials and private and governmental agencies;  Understand pertinent procedures and functions quickly;  Read, understand and apply highly complex materials;
 Formulate and administer the division and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) budget;  Establish and maintain effective relationships with those contacted in the course of work.

Help formulate and carry out City and department policy

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

PHYSICAL DEMANDS AND WORKING CONDITIONS
 Incumbent is required to attend periodic evening meetings.  Incumbent is required to travel within and out of the City to attend meetings.  Positions in this classification are designated as confidential under the Meyers -Millais Brown Act and are exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  The work is primarily sedentary.

38 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

RESOLUTION 22-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S FY 22-23 POSITION

ALLOCATION PLAN

WHEREAS, the FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan in the Public Utilities Department was approved as part of the FY 22-23 City Budget adoption process; and

WHEREAS, a review of the staffing needs for the Public Utilities Department indicates that the addition of one (1) Principal Utilities Engineer position is necessary in order to provide the support necessary for the Public Utilities Department; and

WHEREAS, amending the City’s adopted FY 22-23 Position Allocation Plan requires City Council authorization.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Clovis that the City’s FY 2 2-23 Position Allocation Plan shall be amended as noted in Attachment A.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 2
39 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

POSITION ALLOCATION ADJUSTMENT BY DEPARTMENT FY 22-23

DEPARTMENT NUMBER OF POSITIONS

Public Utilities Department

Add: Principal Utilities Engineer 1.0

ATTACHMENT A
40 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 17- 13 Nees Avenue Street Widening and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

RECOMMENDATION

1. For the City Council to award a contract for CIP 17-13, Nees Avenue Street Widening to Agee Construction Corporation in the amount of $2,854,012.00; and

2. For the City Council to authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is recommending that City Coun cil authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract to Agee Construction Corporation who was the lowest responsible bidder from a bid opening that took place on October 4, 2022.

This project consists of widening westbound Nees Avenue from Minnewawa to Clovis Avenue.

The work includes the installation of sewer, potable water, storm drain, Fresno Irrigation utilities, new streetlights, pavement reconstruction, and concrete improveme nts. In addition, the construction work includes modifications to the existing traffic signal and the installation of new traffic loops and pavement markings, and signs.

41 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BACKGROUND
The following is a summary of the bid results of October 4, 2022:

BIDDERS BASE BIDS

Agee Construction Corporation $2,854,012.00
Avison Construction, Inc. $2,918,506.00
Emmett Valley Construction $2,971,501.00
Emmett’s Excavation, Inc. $2,977,045.00
American Paving Co. $3,143,018.00
Dawson-Mauldin, LLC $3,151,701.00

ENGINEER’S ESTIMATE $2,715,221.50

All bids were examined, and the bidder’s submittals were found to be in order with Agee Construction Corporation as the lowest responsible bidder. Staff has validated the lowest bidder’s contractor license status and completeness of federal funding paperwork.

FISCAL IMPACT
This project is budgeted in the 2022-2023 Community Investment Program. The project is mainly funded by the Regional Surface Transportation Program ( RSTP) through the City Community Investment Program. The sewer improvements are funded by the sewer developer funds and surface improvements directly related to the development on the north side of Nees are funded by that specific developer.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Agee Construction Corporation is the l owest responsible bidder. There are sufficient funds available for the anticipated cost of this project.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

1. The contract will be prepared and executed, subject to the Contractor providing performance security that is satisfactory to the City.

2. Construction will begin approximately one (1) week after contract execution and be completed in twenty ( 85) working days thereafter. Construction start time shall be contingent upon completion of CIP 21-12- Nees Avenue Rule 20B.

Prepared by: Jorge Aguilera, Engineer II

Reviewed by: City Manager JH

42 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Attachment 1
43 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services - Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 21-04, Loma Vista Village Green Offsite Improvements.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

RECOMMENDATION
For the City Council to accept the work performed as complete and authorize recording of the notice of completion.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project consisted of clearing and grubbing, grading, placement of aggregate base, asphalt concrete pavement, construction of valley gutters, curb and gutters, installation of signage and striping, water mains, sewer mains and storm drain facilities on Loma Vista Parkway, Encino Avenue, Person Ranch Avenue, and Rialto Avenue west surrounding and encompassing the Loma Vista Village Green site.

BACKGROUND
Bids were received on September 7, 2021, and the project was awarded by City Council to the low bidder, Avison Construction Inc. , on September 20, 2021 . The project was completed in accordance with the construction documents and the contractor has submitted a request for acceptance of the project.

FISCAL IMPACT

1. Award $1,321,088.00

2. Cost increases/decreases resulting from differences $22,820.87 between estimated quantities used for award and
actual quantities installed.

3. Contract Change Orders $189,827.96

Final Contract Cost $1,533.736.83
44 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

Most of the Contract Change Order Costs were contributed to the oversaturated soil conditions in the subgrade of the streets constructed. This condition was not apparent through the design geotechnical reports therefor e was an unforeseen condition that did not allow for proper compaction of the road section. After engineering analyzed multiple options to remedy the condition, the most cost-effective way resulted in the contractor lime treating the soil in roadway sections to achieve firm subgrade.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Public Utilities Department, the City Engineer, the engineering inspector, and the project engineer agree that the work performed by the contractor is in accordance with the project plans and specifications and has been deemed acceptable. The contractor, Avison Construction, Inc., has requested final acceptance from City Council.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

1. The notice of completion will be recorded; and

2. All remaining retention funds will be released no later than 35 calendar days following recordation of the notice of completion, provided no liens have been filed. Retention funds may be released within 60 days after the date of completion, provided no liens have been filed, with "completion" defined as the earlier of either (a) beneficial use and occupancy and cessation of labor, or (b) acceptance by the City Council per Public Contract Code Section 7107(c)(2).

Prepared by: Tatiana Partain, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: City Manager JH

45 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.
46 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services Department
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: Consider Various Actions Related to the Public Utilities Director Position:
a. Consider Introduction - Ord. 22-___, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Clovis amending Article 5 Department of Public Utilities, Sections 2.2.501 and 2.2.502, and adding sections 2.2.503 and 2.2.504 of Chapter 2.2 (Officers and Employees) of the Clovis Municipal Code Pertaining to the Department of Public Utilities and the Position of Public Utilities Director, and
b. Consider Approval - Res. 22 -___, Authorizing Amendments to the Public Utilities Director Classification within the Public Util ities Department.

Staff: Lori Shively, Personnel/Risk Manager
Recommendation: Approve
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance

2. Resolution 22-___ Amendment to the Classification Plan

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None

RECOMMENDATION
For the City Council to introduce an ordinance of the City of Clovis amending Article 5 Department of Public Utilities, Sections 2.2.501 and 2.2.502, and adding sections 2.2.503, and

2.2.504 of Chapter 2.2 (Officers and Employees) of the Clovis Municipal Code Pertaining to the Department of Public Utilities and the Position of Public Utilities Director; and approve a resolution authorizing amendments to the Public Utilities Director Classification.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed ordinance revisions to the code more clearly define the Public Utilities Director role as the “Superintendent of Streets” and makes the code consistent with the Public Utilities Director job description requirement for possession of a current and valid Civil Engineer license 47 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.
from the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

The ordinance revision also codifies the Public Utilities Director’s authority to approve Public Utility Department maintenance and oper ation plans and specifications, and to inspect and approve City public utility and maintenance improvements prior to acceptance by the City. These are duties that are required of the Public Utilities Director and this ordinance more clearly defines the required job duties.

In combination with the ordinance, staff requests approval of a resolution updating the Public Utilities Director job classification. A copy of the revised job classification is attached as Attachment A of Attachment 2.

BACKGROUND
The proposed ordinance revisions more clearly define the Public Utilities Director role as the Superintendent of Streets in conformance with State law and the Streets and Highways code and the need for the Public Utilities Director to possess a current and valid Civil Engineer license from the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

The Public Utilities Director and the City Engineer work together to deliver the necessary services for the City. In this coordinated approach, the City Engineer is generally responsible to approve plans and specifications for the City. However, in the day -to-day maintenance and operations of the City it is also necessary that the Public Utilities Direc tor have plan and specification approval authority. The proposed ordinance codifies the Public Utilities Director existing authority to design, plan and approve plans and specifications for City public utility improvements with respect to maintenance and o perations. It specifies that the Public Utilities Director has the authority to inspect and approve City public utility and maintenance projects prior to acceptance by the City. The above duties are in addition to duties and responsibilities, and authority that may be prescribed in the Municipal Code, State law, and the job classification.

Finally, staff recommends updating the Public Utilities Director classification specification to define the required job duties and reflect the responsibilities listed in the updated ordinance more accurately. Changes to the classification include some minor wording changes and typographical fixes, updating the name of the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists, identifies that the Public Utilities Director may “approve plans on behalf of the City for construction of City public utility maintenance and operation improvements”, and adds “inspect and approve City public utility and maintenance improvements”. Modification of the City’s Classification Plan requires the City Council’s approval.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

48 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
If approved, the ordinance will more clearly define the duties that are performed by the Public Utilities Director and better defines the authority of the position. The job classification is also being updated to state the current job duties that the Public Utilities Director is performing.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
This ordinance will return for a second reading on November 7, 2022, and if approved, go into effect 30 days thereafter. The City’s Classification Plan will be updated to include the revised Public Utilities Director classification.

Prepared by: Lori Shively, Personnel/Risk Manager

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
49 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

ORDINANCE NO. 22 - __

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS AMENDING ARTICLE 5 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES, SECTIONS 2.2.501 AND 2.2.502, AND ADDING SECTIONS 2.2.503 AND 2.2.504 OF CHAPTER 2.2 (Officers and Employees)

OF THE CLOVIS MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

UTILITIES AND THE POSITION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES DIRECTOR

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Article 5, Sections 2.2.501 through 2.2.504 of Chapter 2.2, are hereby amended and added in the Clovis Municipal Code to read as follows:

Chapter 2.2

OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
Article 5. Department of Public Utilities

2.2.501 Public Utilities Director.

The Public Utilities Director shall be the head of the Public Utilities Department. The Public Utilities Director shall be a licensed civil engineer in the State of California and meet the additional minimum qualifications set forth in the most recent job classification approved by the City Council.

2.2.502 Director of Public Works Public Utilities Director: Additional titles.

Wherever in this Code or under any law or act of the State reference is made to the “Superintendent of Streets” or “Street Superintendent,” such reference shall be construed as meaning the Director of Public Works Public Utilities Director, and he who shall exercise all the powers and duties of such “Superintendent of Streets” or “Street Superintendent.”

2.2.503 Duties, responsibilities, and authority of Public Utilities Director.

In addition to the duties, responsibilities, and authority that may be prescribed in the Municipal Code, State law, and the most recent job classification approved by the City Council, the Public Utilities Director shall have authority for the following:
(a) As defined in a mutually developed procedural guideline, coordinate with the City’s Capital Improvement Program, that functions under the Planning Development Services Department, to design, plan, and approve plans, specifications and/or designs for the Department of Public Utilities maintenance and operation of City public ut ility improvements, and to direct the repair, maintenance and expansion of City public utility improvements, including, but not necessarily limited to: water and sewer utilities, established parks, recycled water, solid waste disposal, ATTACHMENT 1
50 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

(b) landfill systems, preventative streets maintenance, street improvements, sustainable energy systems, and drainage infrastructure systems
(b) To inspect and approve City public utility projects prior to acceptance by the City.

2.2.504 Immunities
Nothing in this Article is intended to modify, negate, eliminate, or remove any immunities the City or Public Utilities Director may have under the Municipal Code or State law regarding the preparation, review and discretionary approval of plans and specifications.

Section 3 This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

APPROVED: October 17, 2022

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

* * * * * * * * * *

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the City Council held on October 17, 2022, and was adopted at a regular meeting of said Council held on November 7, 2022, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

_______________________________
City Clerk

51 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

RESOLUTION-22- ____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S CLASSIFICATION PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC UTILITIES

DIRECTOR CLASSIFICATION

WHEREAS, a review of the Public Utilities Director responsibilities has identified a need to update the classification specification; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the classification should be amended in order to accurately state the requirements needed for the classification; and

WHEREAS, modification of the City’s Classification Plan requires authorization by the City Council.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the City of Clovis shall modify the City’s Classification Plan to include the re vised Public Utilities Director classification specification (Attachment A).

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 2
52 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

City of Clovis

PUBLIC UTILITIES DIRECTOR

DEFINITION
Under administrative direction, to plan, organize and direct the City's field services and utilities activities; to advise the City Manager and City Council regarding public utility matters; and to perform related work as required.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This on e-position classification is the operational management officer of the Public Utilities Department. The incumbent is responsible to the City Manager for advice and consultation on engineering and operational matters including water supply, production and distribution, water meter reading, fleet maintenance and renewal , sewer , reclaimed water , and storm drain maintenance, parks and landscape maintenance, traffic signals and street lighting, solid waste, landfill operations, street sweeping, and street maintenance, regulatory compliance, and utility structure. The Public Utilities Director exercises supervision over other managerial employees, making assignments, setting priorities, training , and reviewing work. The incumbent is responsible for preparing performance evaluations, processing employee grievances, recommending employment, and for taking and recommending disciplinary action. The position in this class acts with a high degree of independence of action in the assigned area of responsibility. Direction received consists of the assignment of the responsibility to attain objectives according to policy guidelines. The incumbent is expected to develop methods and procedures and solve problems encountered. Except where a deviation in p olicy is involved, most work is not reviewed directly by a supervisor and when work is reviewed, the review is directed toward final outcomes and results. This is an exempt position in which the incumbent serves at the will of the City Manager.

EXAMPLES OF DUTIES
Plans, organizes and controls the activities of the Public Uutilities Department comprised of and maintenance and operations divisions, including fresh water supply and distribution, sewer maintenance, reclaimed water, street maintenance, storm dr ainage, park maintenance, fleet, traffic signals and street lighting , and solid waste collection and disposal; evaluate s the need for and develops plans and schedules for long -range utilities programs; organize s available resources for the maintenance, imp rovement and repair of utilities facilities; compile s estimates, contract provisions and specifications; confer s with the City Manager and various public groups on proposed projects and improvements; confer s with subordinates on the construction, repair and maintenance of facilities; interacts with other departments on problems of design, materials and processes proposed in connection with new construction or major repairs; approve plans on behalf of the City for construction of City public utility maintena nce and operation improvements; inspect and approve City public utility and maintenance improvements; prepares ordinances for Council consideration; determines and recommends

ATTACHMENT A
53 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

levels of service for utilities, street sweeping, park maintenance, fleet, traffic signals and street lighting, refuse collection and storm drains; participate s in the selection of new employees; represents the City in relations with other governmental age ncies; direct s the solid waste disposal program; confer s with private engineering firms and developers; conduct s field inspections; formulate s program definition and policy; develop s and administer s budget; conducts performance evaluations; explain s policies, procedures and objectives of the department to staff by written directive and by oral communications; conduct s staff meetings; and performs related work as required.

TYPICAL QUALIFICATIONS

LICENSE REQUIRED
 Possession of a valid and appropriate California Driver's License and a good driving record.
 Possession of registration as an a current and valid Civil Engineer license from with the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
Education:
 Ggraduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering major work in civil, mechanical, electrical or safety engineering or a closely related field.

Education Desirable:
 A master’s degree in Civil Engineering or a closely related field. is desirable.

Experience:
 A minimum of five (5) years of increasingly responsible professional civil engineering and administrative experience, with at least a minimum of three (3) years in a supervisory or administrative capacity in municipal or county government.

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
 Technical, legal, financial and public relations problems involved in the conduct of municipal public works programs;
 Methods of preparing designs, plans, specifications, estimates, reports and recommendations relating to municipal utilities and proposed public works facilities;  Federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to municipal public works and utilities;
 Principles of supervision and training;
 Engineering principles and practices as applied to the field of municipal utilities;  Appropriate safety precautions and procedures.

54 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Ability to:
 Prepare comprehensive and complex technical reports;
 Provide leadership and a clear focus on mission to establish and maintain effective working relationships with subordinates, public groups and organizations, City officials and private and governmental agencies;
 Understand pertinent procedures and functions quickly;  Read, understand and apply highly complex materials;
 Formulate and administer budgets;
 Communicate clearly and concisely, orally and in writing;  Establish and maintain effective relationships with those contacted in the course of work.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

PHYSICAL DMANDS AND WORKING CONDITIONS

 Incumbent is required to attend periodic frequent evening meetings.  Incumbent is required to travel within and outside of City to attend meetings.  Positions in this classification are designated as confidential under the Meyers-Millais Brown Act and are exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act;  Work is primarily sedentary.

55 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services
DATE: October 17, 2022
SUBJECT: Consider items related to the incorporation of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) into the General Plan Circulation Element. City of Clovis, applicant.

a. Consider Approval – Res. 22-___, A request to certify a supplemental environmental impact report, adopt findings of fact, and adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

b. Consider Approval – Res. 22-___, GPA2022-003, A request to amend the 2014 General Plan to incorporate pol icy changes to the Circulation Element to incorporate provisions related to the vehicle miles traveled traffic impact evaluation criterion.

c. Consider Approval – Res. 22 -___, A request to adopt updated transportation impact analysis guidelines.

Staff: Dave Merchen, City Planner
Recommendation: Approve

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Res. 22-___ EIR

2. Res. 22-___ GPA

3. Res. 22-___ TIA Guidelines

4. Draft EIR

5. Final EIR

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommen ds that the City Council adopt resolutions to certify a supplemental environmental impact report (EIR) for the Project, approve GPA2022 -003 incorporating vehicle miles traveled (VMT) policies into the Circulation Element, and adopt updated transportation impact analysis (TIA) guidelines.
56 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On July 1, 2020, the metric by which transportation impacts are assessed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines shifted from a level of service (LOS) based analysis, to VMT analysis. In short, the methodology for analyzing transportation impacts under CEQA transitioned from assessing increases in delay and congestion caused by a project to assessing the average distance traveled by vehicles related to the project, known as VMT.

The proposed project would modify existing policies in the Circulation Element and add new policies to reflect the new requirements. The City’s TIA Guidelines have also been updated to establish thresholds for VMT impacts to provide guidance on evaluating proposed projects under the VMT criteria.

A Supplemental EIR to the 2014 General Plan EIR has been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project . The EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds despite the application of feasible mitigation measures, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts. The City Council will consider the adoption of a statement of overriding considerations in conjunction with its consideration of the Project. A statement of overriding considerations is a determination that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, allowing the adverse environmental effects to be considered acceptable.

The Planning Commission considered the project at its September 22, 2022 , meeting.

Resolutions recommending approval of each project component were adopted in a 4 -0 vote, Commissioner Bedsted absent.

BACKGROUND
 February 18, 2020 : The City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a consultant agreement with Kittelson and Associates, Inc. for modifying the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to incorporate VMT analysis criteria.

 July 1, 2020 : New state law (SB 743) went into effect changing t he metric by which transportation impacts are assessed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines from a level of service (LOS) based analysis to VMT analysis.

 July 20, 2020 : The City Council adopted Interim VMT Guidelines for the City so that development could continue moving forward and appropriately assess traffic impacts using the new VMT metric. The “final” version is included as part of the Project currently under consideration.

 April 5, 2021 : The City Council authorized the City Manager to amend the previously approved agreement with Kittelson and Associates to include making modifications to the City’s 2014 General Plan Circulation Element and preparing a Supplemental EIR to the General Plan EIR.

57 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
In response to Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), the City initiated efforts to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was consistent with the State’s mandates. This effort led to the de velopment of the Interim TIA Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20 -93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the City for the purpose of determi ning impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

As the City developed the Interim TIA Guidelines in response to the requirements of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s 2014 General Plan Circulation Element needed to be updated to be in alignment with the State’s mandates and the Interim TIA Guidelines. The City then initiated an update to the Circulation Element, which focuses on policy language additions that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms. Proposed policy changes are outlined in Attachment 2A. Proposed policy changes only affect the Circulation Element, and no land use or other changes are included.

Proposed changes to the Circulation Element include adding language to the “Overarching Goal” to “encourage reduction in VMT through well -planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.” Proposed P olicy 2.6 specifies that d evelopment projects shall “comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis. ” Examples of other pol icy changes include promoting carpooling, exploring the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program, and partnering with local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale. A set of new policies (Policies 8.1-8.6) encourages improved connectivity through alternative modes of transportation, focusing on transportation demand measures, transit, bicycle lanes, non-vehicular connectivity between uses, community outreach, and employer commute programs.

Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines
As described above, in February of 2020, the City initiated efforts to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was consistent with both State’s mandates and City policy.

This effort led to t he development of the Interim TIA Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20 -93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the City for the purpose of determining impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Interim Guidelines are proposed to be adopted as Final Guidelines in conjunction with the current Project (See Attachment 3A). The Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are intended to:

• Promote conformance with applicable City and State regulations • Provide evaluation consistent with CEQA
• Ensure consistency in preparation of studies by applicants and consultants • Provide predictability in content for City staff and the public in reviewing studies 58 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

The Guidelines are intended to be comprehensive, however, not all aspects of every transportation analysis can be addressed within this framework and the City staff reserves the right to use its judgment to request exemptions and/or to modify requirements for specific projects at the time of the review application. The
Guidelines provide criteria for “screening out” projects from further VMT analysis, based on factors including
the location, type and size of projects. A key
component of the Guidelines is the establishment of
“thresholds” for determining when VMT impacts are
considered significant.

Although the State Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) recommends that projects achieve a 15%
reduction in VMT from the existing “regional” average,
lead agencies have the discretion to adopt different
thresholds as long as they are supported by substantial evidence. The evaluation completed by the City and its consulting team supported adjusted thresholds, as follows:

 Residential: A 13% reduction below existing average VMT/capita in Fresno County.  Office: A 13% reduction below existing average VMT/employee in Fresno County.  Retail: No net increase in total VMT.
 Other Land Uses: Determined on a case -by-case basis, supported by substantial evidence.
 Mixed Use Projects: Evaluate each componen t of a mixed -use and apply the significance threshold for each land use type.

Under the VMT methodology, mitigation measures to reduce transportation impacts will shift from relieving traffic congestion through capacity-increasing solutions (i.e. adding lanes, road widening, and traffic signals) to more Transportation Demand Management (TDM) oriented measures. TDM measures focus more on behavioral and infrastructure changes to support and/or encourage shifts in transportation modes away from singl e-occupancy vehicle use.

Because VMT is dependent on location and proximity of residential to employment, goods and services, mitigation measures will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The City determined that the proposed Project required the preparation of a Supplemental EIR to the General Plan EIR. Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines states that a S upplemental EIR must be prepared for a project if there is a new significant environm ental effect or new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. An evaluation of the proposed Project determined that new information of substantial importance would res ult, therefore triggering the need for a supplemental EIR. The supplemental-level analysis focuses on the environmental effects from transportation only.

PROJECTS THAT SCREEN OUT

1. Small projects

2. Affordable housing projects

3. Local-serving retail

4. Project located in a High-Quality
Transit Area (HQTA)

5. Project located in low VMT area

59 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

A Draft Supplemental EIR ( Attachment 4) was completed in June of this year and was made available for review by affected agencies and the public between June 29 th and August 15 th.

During that period, the City responded to specific questions from local stakeholders, and held a live and virtual public informational session on the proposed Project and the EIR. The City received a total of two comment letters on the Draft EIR, from public agencies (Caltrans, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District). The comment letters, as well as the required responses to each comment, are included in the Final EIR (Attachment 5).

The Supplemental EIR determined that most potential impacts associated with the proposed policy changes were less than significant. However, the analysis identified that implementation of the General Plan may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds despite the application of feasible mitigation measures, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts. Mitigation measures are outlined in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment 1C). The identification of significant and unavoidable impacts does not mean that the Project cannot be approved. The City Council will consider the adoption of a statement of overriding considerations in conjunction with its consideration of the Project. A statement of overriding considerations is a determination that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, allowing the adverse environmental effects to be considered acceptable.

Applicability of the Supplemental EIR to Future Projects If the City Council ultimately certifies the Supplemental EIR and adopts a statement of overriding considerations, i t is anticipated that the original General Plan EIR, combined with the Supplemental EIR will be used in conjunction with future site-specific evaluations. Requirements for analysis of VMT impacts related to future site-specific approvals may be narrowed pursuant to the rules for tiering set forth in CEQA Guidelines.

Future projects will be reviewed under the TIA Guidelines described above. Projects that don’t “screen out” of VMT analysis will perform a project specific VMT assessment and appropriate mitigation measures will be incorporated. If the project -level analysis con cludes that VMT impacts will be significant and unavoidable, even with feasible mitigation measures applied, the project will be able to tier off of the Supplemental General Plan EIR and eliminate the need to prepare a new EIR based on VMT impacts alone.

Public Input
As described above, the City published a public notice and held a public information meeting for the Draft Supplemental EIR. Comments on the EIR as well as required responses are included in the Final EIR. In preparation for the public heari ng to consider the general plan amendment and final TIA Guidelines, the City published notice of this public hearing in The Business Journal on September 9, 2022, and October 5, 2022. No comments have been received.

Planning Commission Consideration
The Planning Commission considered the proposed project at its September 22, 2022, meeting.

During the public hearing, no public testimony was offered and there were no substantive questions or discussion from or by the Planning Commission.

60 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

The Commission voted to approve each element of the project with a 4 -0 vote, with Commissioner Bedsted absent.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The P roject proposes to modify existing goals and policies in the General Plan Circulation Element to reflect the new requirements of SB 743, relating to VMT analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act . The City’s TIA Guidelines have also been updated to establish thresholds for VMT impacts and to provide guidance on evaluating proposed projects under the VMT criteria. The Project meets the required findings for the approval of a general plan amendment, as outlined below.

Findings for Approval of a General Plan Amendment
The findings to consider when making a decision on a general plan amendment appl ication include:

1. The proposed amendments are internally consistent with goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan;

The proposed amendments are consistent with existing general plan policies which include an emphasis on multi -modal transportation, neighborhood connectivity, maintaining a job-housing balance, and establishing an appropriate mix of land uses.

2. The proposed amendments would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City;

The Project is not detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, and convenience, or general welfare of the City. The proposal would incorporate policy language into the General Plan intended to support compliance with VMT analysis requirements enacted at the State level, and to encourage reductions in VMT in conjunction with project design and review.

3. If applicable, the parcel is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities) for the requested/ anticipated project;

Because this finding applies to physical suit ability of a parcel, this finding is not applicable to the proposed Project.

4. There is compelling reason for the amendment.

The proposal would incorporate policy language into the General Plan intended to support compliance with VMT analysis requirements enacted at the State level.

61 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
None.

Prepared by: Dave Merchen, City Planner

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
62 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Attachment 1
DRAFT
RESOLUTION 22-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS CERTIFYING THE

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2022-003 AND THE ADOPTION OF UPDATED TRAFFIC IMPACT

ANALYSIS GUIDELINES, ADOPT CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT AND A STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING

PROGRAM

WHEREAS, the City of Clovis, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis CA, 93619, initiated an application for General Plan Amendment 2022 -003 to amend the 2014 General Plan to incorporate policy changes to the Circulation Element to incorporate provisions related to the vehicle miles traveled traffic impact evaluation criterion (“the Project”); and

WHEREAS, GPA 2022 -03 is limited to the policy modificat ions to the Circulation Element and no land use changes or other amendments are proposed; and

WHEREAS, the Project also proposes to update the City’s existing transportation impact analysis (TIA) guidelines to incorporate thresholds and implementation guidance for VMT analysis; and

WHEREAS, the City caused to be prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“Draft SEIR”) for the Project in June 2022 to evaluate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Draft SEIR was made available for a 45 -day public review period beginning on June 29, 2022 and ending on August 15, 2022, during which time all interested parties were invited to submit written comments on the Draft SEIR for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council; and

WHEREAS, a public meeting was held on July 19, 2022 to provide information on the Project and the Draft SEIR and to allow interested parties to ask questions; and

WHEREAS, the City caused to be prepared a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“Final SEIR”) for the Project, dated September 2022 , which contains comments upon the Draft SEIR and responses thereto, as well as changes and additions to the Draft SEIR text and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program; and

WHEREAS, the Draft SEIR and the Final SEIR collectively make up the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Draft SEIR and Final SEIR were prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq., and the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of R egulations, Sections 15000 et seq. (the “CEQA Guidelines”); and
63 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed Public Hearing on September 22, 2022 to consider the Project and the EIR, at which time interested persons were given opportunity to comment on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted and recommended that the Council certify the EIR and approve the project, including the adoption of findings of fact and a statement of overriding considerations; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission’s action was forwarded to the City Council for consideration; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed Public Hearing on October 17, 2022 to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendations and to consider the Project and the EIR; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review and consider the entire Administrative Record relating to the Project and the EIR , which is on file with the City’s Department of Planning and Development Services (“Department”) , and reviewed and considered those portions of the Administrative Record determined to be necessary to make an informed decision, including, but not necessarily limited to, the staff report, the written materials submitted with the request, and the verbal and written testimony and other evidence presented during the public hearing; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has independently reviewed and considered the EIR; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has evaluated and considered all comments, written and oral, received from persons who reviewed the D raft SEIR or the Final SEIR, or otherwise commented on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has independently reviewed and considered the CEQA Statement of Facts and Findings ( Attachment A ), the proposed form of Statement of Overriding Considerations ( Attachment B), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment C).

NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD OF THE
PROCEEDINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AND FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

1. Finds that the EIR for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

2. Finds and declares that the EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR prior to recommending approval of the Project.

3. Based upon its review of the EIR, finds that the EIR is an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project as described in the 64 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

EIR, sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project, and represents the independent judgment of the City Council.

4. Finds that the Final SEIR additions, clarifications, amplifications, modifications and other information in response to comments on the Draft SEIR are not significant new information as that term is defined under the provisions of CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines because such changes and additional information do not indicate that (i) any new significant environmental impacts not already evaluated would result from the Project (ii) there is any substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impact from the Project, (iii) any feasible mitigation measures considerably different from those previously analyzed in the Draft SEIR have been proposed that would lessen significant environmental impacts of the Project, or (iv) any feasible alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the Draft SEIR have been proposed that would lessen the significant environmental impacts of the Project. Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds and determines that recirculation of t he Final SEIR for further public review and comment is not warranted.

5. The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the Project, has considered all feasible mitigation measures, a nd has examined potentially feasible alternatives to the Project.

6. Finds that none of the project alternatives analyzed in the EIR meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the Project and none of the alternatives are environmentally preferable to the proposed Project.

7. Finds that, after considering all feasible mitigation measures and weighing the advantages and disadvantages of the Project , as proposed , with the Project alternatives, including the significant and unavoidable impacts, the feasibility of project alternatives, and the “no project” alternative, the Project as proposed and described in the EIR may be approved.

8. Certifies the EIR as adequate and completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

9. Adopts the CEQA Statement of Facts and Findings set forth in Attachment A.

10. Adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations substantially in the form set forth in Attachment B , with such modifications, additions or deletions as the City Council deems appropriate.

11. Adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Attachment C, including the mitigation measures identified therein and as described in the EIR.

12. Directs that the record of proceedings be contained in the Department of Planning and Development Services located at 1033 5th Street, Clovis, CA 93612, and that 65 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
the custodian of the record be the City Planner or other person designated by the Director of Planning and Development Services.

* * * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATE: October 17, 2022

______________________________ ____________________________ Mayor City Clerk

66 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Attachment A

CEQA STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS

GPA2022-003 & TIA GUIDELINES
2014 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

I. BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a number of written findings be made by th e lead agency in connection with certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approval of the project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code. This d ocument provides the f indings required by CEQA.

A. PROJECT SUMMARY
Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines
In response to SB 743, the City of Clovis initiated effort s to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was both consistent with the State’s mandates, and City policy. This effort led to the development of the Inte rim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20 -93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to eva luate transportation impact s for projects in the city for the purpose of determining impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are intended to:
• promote conformance with applicable City and State regulations; • provide evaluation consistent with CEQA;
• ensure consistency in preparation of studies by applicants and consultants; and • provide predictability in content for City staff and the public in reviewing studies.

The guidelines are in tended to be comprehensive, however, not all aspects of every transportati on analysis can be addressed within this framework and the City staff reserves the right to use its judgement to request exemptions and/or to modify requirements for specific project s at the time of the review application.

The Clovis TIA Guidelines provide the following five screening criteria to determine if a project will require a detailed VMT analysis:

1. Small projects

2. Provision of affordable housing

3. Local-serving retail

4. Project located in a High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)

5. Project located in low VMT area
67 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Circulation Element Update
The proposed project is an update to the City of Clovis 2014 General Plan Circulation Element. The Clovis City Council adopted the Clovis General Plan on August 25, 201 4. Included i n the General Plan is the Circulation Element, which determines the transportation system necessary to accommodate the planned land use and development. The Circulation Element identifies the general location and extent of existi ng and propose d major trans portation facilities, including major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities. The goals and policies in this element are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and a re intended to provide a balance between the City’s future growth and land use development , roadway size, traffic service levels, and community character.

As the City of Clovis developed the Interim TIA Guidelines in response to the requirements of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s Circulation Element need ed to be updated to be in align ment with the State’s mandates, and the Interim TIA Guidelines. City staff then embarked on an update to the Circulation Element, which focuses on policy language additions that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms.

Focused Update
The City of Clovis has prepared a focused update to its existing General Plan. The proposed Project concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change a ny other Element of the General Plan. The propo sed Project also includes adoption of the T ransportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, which are supportive of the Circulation Element.

The focused General Plan Update does not affect land uses or development p atterns, and does not result in any physical development. The key components of the focused General Plan Update include revisions to the goals and policies in the Circulation Element. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form.

The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form for ease of identifying the proposed text changes.

Clovis General Plan Goals and Policies
OVERARCHING GOAL: A comprehensive and well-maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through well-planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.

Goal 1: A context-sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs.

Policy 1.1 Multimodal network. The city shall plan, design, operate, and maintain the transportation network to promote safe and convenient travel for all users:
pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, freight, and motorists.

Policy 1.2 Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance the comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Policy 1.3 Age and mobility. The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities. 68 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 1.4 Jobs and housing. Encourage infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing, and vice versa, to reduce citywide vehicle miles travelled and effectively utilize the existing transportation infrastructure, as well as promote carpooling whenever possible.

Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood-serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).

Policy 1.6 Internal circulation. New development shall utilize a grid or modified-grid street pattern. Areas designated for residential and mixed-use village developments should feature short block lengths of 200 to 600 feet.

Policy 1.7 Narrow streets. The City may permit curb-to-curb dimensions that are narrower than current standards on local streets to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and enhance safety.

Policy 1.8 Network completion. New development shall complete the extension of stub streets planned to connect to adjacent streets, where appropriate.

Goal 2: A roadway network that is well planned, funded, and maintained.

Policy 2.1 Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:

1. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours

2. Allow exceptions on a case -by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
• Preserving agriculture or open space land
• Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood • Preserving or creating a pedestrian-friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts
• Avoiding adverse im pacts to pedestrians, cycli sts, and mass transit riders where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible
Policy 2.2 Multimodal LOS. Monitor the evolution of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standards. The city may adopt MMLOS standards when appropriate.

Policy 2.3 Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.

Policy 2.4 Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right-of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation.

The City shall request the County of Fresno to apply the same requirements in the Clovis planning area.

Policy 2.5 Regional and state roadway funding. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to fund roadway improvements adjacent to and within the City’s Planning Area.

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Development projects shall comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program. Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in-lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.
69 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders. Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Goal 3: A multimodal transportation network that is safe and comfortable in the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1 Traffic calming. Employ traffic-calming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.

Policy 3.2 Neighborhood compatibility. Periodically review and update design standards to ensure that new and redesigned streets are compatible with the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3 Old Town and mixed use village centers. Transportation decisions on local streets in Old Town and mixed-use village centers shall prioritize pedestrians, then bicyclists, then mass transit, then motorists.

Policy 3.4 Road diets. Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.

Policy 3.5 Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or intersection expansions after considering multimodal alternative improvements to non-automotive facilities.

Policy 3.6 Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.

Policy 3.7 Conflict points. Minimize the number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.

Policy 3.8 Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.

Policy 3.9 Park-once. Encourage “park-once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well-marked access to sidewalks and businesses.

Policy 3.10 Pedestrian access and circulation. Entrances at signalized intersections should provide sidewalks on both sides of the entrance that connect to an internal pedestrian pathway to businesses and throughout nonresidential parking lots larger than 50 spaces.

Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and right-of-ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non- motorized transportation.

Policy 3.12 Residential orientation. Where feasible, residential development should face local and collector streets to increase visibility and safety of travelers along the streets, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access.

Goal 4: A well-planned and maintained pedestrian circulation network that promotes increased use of the City’s bicycle, and transit, and pedestrian system facilities in order to reduce that serves as a functional alternative to commuting by single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible car.

Policy 4.1 Bike and transit backbone. The bicycle and transit system should connect Shaw Avenue, Old Town, the Medical Center/R&T Park, and the three Urban Centers.
70 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 4.2 Priority for new bicycle facilities. Prioritize investments in the backbone system over other bicycle improvements.

Policy 4.3 Freeway crossings. Require separate bicycle and pedestrian crossings for new freeway extensions and encourage separate crossings where Class I facilities are planned to cross existing freeways.

Policy 4.4 Bicycles and transit. Coordinate with transit agencies to integrate bicycle access and storage into transit vehicles, bus stops, and activity centers.

Policy 4.5 Transit stops. Improve and maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit, and rider- friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy 4.6 Transit priority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.

Policy 4.7 Bus rapid transit. Plan for bus rapid transit and transit-only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase.

Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents focusing on connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods, parks, trails, and goods and services.

Policy 5.1 Complete street amenities. Upgrade existing streets and design new streets to include complete street amenities, prioritizing improvements to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety, consistent with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan and other master plans.

Policy 5.2 Development-funded facilities. Require development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan Bicycle Transportation Plan when facilities are in or adjacent to the development.

Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.

Policy 5.4 Homeowner associations. The city may require homeowner associations to maintain pathways and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the homeowner association area.

Policy 5.5 Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity centers and to provide general pedestrian connectivity throughout the city.

Goal 6: Safe and efficient goods movement with minimal impacts on local roads and neighborhoods.

Policy 6.1 Truck routes. Plan and designate truck routes that minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Policy 6.2 Land use. Place industrial and warehousing businesses near freeways and truck routes to minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Goal 7: A regional transportation system that connects Clovis to the San Joaquin Valley region.

Policy 7.1 Clovis Avenue extension. Invest in the extension of Clovis Avenue north to Copper Avenue as funding is available.

Policy 7.2 Right-of-way for future extensions. Coordinate with Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to preserve future right-of-way for extending Clovis Avenue north of Copper Avenue to Auberry Road and future State Route 65.
71 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 7.3 San Joaquin River crossing. Collaborate with the Fresno Council of Governments and appropriate agencies to secure a San Joaquin River crossing between State Route 41 and North Fork Road.

Goal 8: Improve and enhance the circulation network in a manner that reduces VMT through improved connectivity by focusing on modes of transportation that promotes the reduction in the use of single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management. Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that promote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, employees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, continue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people between residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes. Seek input from and/or partner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to improve the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe and efficient travel lanes.

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial. Continue to explore opportunities for increased non-vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education. Explore the feasibility of a community outreach and education program that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non-vehicular modes of transportation for commuting and recreation.

Policy 8.6 Employer commute programs. Work with businesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single-occupancy vehicles, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on-site shower facilities, and perks for employees who commute.

B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives were established for the proposed Project:

1. Update City Policy in the Circulation Element to meet the mandates of State law relat ed to conformance with SB 743.

2. Establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to meet the requirements of State law.

3. Updates to City Policy and Guidelines should not obstruct and prevent the City from growing in accordance with the City’s existing plans for growth.

C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In conformance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Clovis CEQA Guidelines, the City of Clovis conducted an environmental review of the proposed project. ▪ The City of Clovis determined that an E IR would be required for t he proposed project and issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on April 4, 2022 . The public review period extended from April 4, 2022, to May 4, 2022.
▪ Based upon the Initial Study and Environmental Checklist Form, the City of Clovis staff determined that a Draft Supplemental EIR (SEIR) should be prepared for the proposed project.

The scope of the D raft SEIR was d etermined based on the City’s Initial Study, comments 72 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

received in response to the NOP, and comments rece ived at the scoping meetin g conducted by the City. Chapter 1.0 of the Draft SEIR describes the issues identified for analysis in the DEIR. ▪ The City of Clovis prepared a Draft SEIR, which was made available for a 45-day public review period beginning June 29, 2022, and ending August 15, 2022. ▪ The City prepared a Final EIR (FEIR), including the Responses to Comments to the D raft SEIR, the se Findings of Fact, and the Statement of Overri ding Consideration s. The FEIR/Response to Comments contains comments on th e D raft SEIR, responses to those comments, revisions to the Draft SEIR, and appended documents.

D. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For pur poses of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the propose d p roject consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
▪ The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project
▪ The FEIR for the proposed project
▪ The Draft SEIR
▪ All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft SEIR
▪ All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or m embers of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft SEIR
▪ All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed p ublic hea ring for the proposed project
▪ The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
▪ The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Response to Comments ▪ All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft SEIR and FEIR
▪ The Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment period and responses thereto
▪ Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state , and local laws and regulations
▪ Any documents expressly cited in these Findings
▪ Any other r elevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Re sources Code Section 21167.6(e)
E. CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrativ e record for the City's actions related to the p roject are at the City of Clovis , 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 . The City’s Department of Planning and Development Services is the custodian of the administrative record for the project. Copies of these documents, which constit ute the record of procee dings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Department of Planning and De velopment Services . This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and Guidelines Section 15091(e). 73 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

F. FINDINGS AND FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City of Clovis , as lead agency, is required under CEQA to make written findings concerning each alternative and each significant environmental impact identified in the Draft SEIR and FEIR.

Specifically, regarding findings, Guidelines Section 15091 provides:
(a) No public agency shall ap prove or carry out a proje ct for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more signif icant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of th e rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alt erations have been requir ed in, or incorporated i nto, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal , social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of e mployment opportunities f or highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alter natives identified in the FEIR.
(b) The findings required by subsection (a ) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
(c) The findin g in subdivision (a)(2) s hall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alt ernatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific re asons for rejecting ident ified mitigation measure s and project alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall a lso adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based.
(f) A statement made pursu ant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section.

The “changes or alterations” referred to in Section 15091(a)(1) m ay include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines Section 15370, including:
74 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

(a) Avoiding the impact altoge ther by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the d egree or magnitude of th e action and its implementation.
(c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the i mpacted environment.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenanc e operations during the life of the action.
(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

II. FINDINGS AND FACTS REGARDING IMPACTS
This section of the document is divided into the following parts:
▪ Part A, Impacts Determined to Be Less Than Significant or have No Impact, presents the impacts of the proposed project that were determined in the Initial Study and Draft SEIR to be less than significant or have no impact without the addition of mitigation measures. ▪ Part B, Significant Unavoidable Impacts, presents significant impacts of the proposed project that were identified in the Draft SEIR, the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigat ion Monitoring and Reporting Program, the findings for significant impacts, and the rationales fo r the findings.

A. IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR HAVE NO IMPACT
Initial Study
An Initial Study was prepared by the City of Clovis to identify the potential significant effects of the project. As a result of the project scoping process, including the NOP circulated by the City on April 4, 2022, in connection with preparation of the Initial Study; the preparation of the D raft SEIR; and the public scoping meeting held on April 27, 2022 , the City determined, based upon the threshold criteria for significance, that the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on the following potential envi ronmental issu es, and therefore determined that these potential environmental issues would not be addressed in the Draft SEIR. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the Draft SEIR and the comments received by the public on the Draft SEIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City that indicated that the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas:
(a) Aesthetics: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development C ode Update (State Clearing house No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation an d transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As 75 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (b) Agriculture and Forestry Resources: This CEQA topic has been adequately ana lyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standar ds. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effe ct on this this CEQA topic . Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to thi s C EQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.
(c) Air Quality: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 201206 1069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation an d transportation topics, b ut will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in n o anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (d) Biological Resources: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Deve lopment Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narro wly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (e) Cultural Resources: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable lega l standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a dire ct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no antic ipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (f) Energy: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghous e No. 20 12061069) pursuant to 76 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s po licy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (g) Geology and Soils: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR fo r the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (h) Greenhouse Gas Emissions : This CEQA top ic has been adequately ana lyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (i) Hazards a nd H azardous Materials: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Developm ent Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s pol icy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic . Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmen tal effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.
(j) Hydrology and Water Quality: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a d irect or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable 77 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (k) Land Use and P lanning: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Deve lopment Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (l) Mineral Resources: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a dire ct or indirect effect on th is this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. Noise: This CEQA topic has been adequately a nalyzed in th e certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant t o applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not ha ve a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the ce rtified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.
(m) Population and Housing: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearin ghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the C ity’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (n) Hazards and H azardous Materials: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable l egal standard s. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a dir ect or indirect effec t on this 78 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

this CEQA topic . Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no a nticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.
(o) Public Services: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (p) Recreation: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Developme nt Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy ch anges will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA t opic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (q) Tribal Cultural Resources: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable le gal standards. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a di rect or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipa ted environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. (r) Utilities and Service Systems: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standards. The City’s policy changes will narr owly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic.

Instead, the City’s pol icy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. 79 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

(s) Wildfire: This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certi fied EIR for the Gene ral Plan and Development Code Update (State Clearinghous e No. 2012061069) pursuant to applicable legal standar ds. The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indir ect effect on this this CEQA topic .

Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis.

The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.

Draft SEIR
This section identifies impacts of the proposed project determined to be less than significant without implementation of project-specific mitigation measures. This determination assumes compliance with Existing Regulations and existing and proposed General Plan Update Poli cies as detailed in C hapter

3.1 of the Draft SEIR.
(a) Transportation and Traffic: The proposed Project would not conflict with a progr am, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; or increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access.
(b) Cumulative Transportation and Traffic: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities ; or increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access.

B. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The following summary d escribes the unavoidable adverse impact of the proposed project where either mitigation measures were found to be infeasible or mitigation would not lessen impacts to less than significant. The following impact would remain significant and unavoidable:

1. Transportation and Traffic
Impact 3.1-2: General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions).

Finding 1 – The City hereby makes Finding 1 given that VMT reduction depends on factors such as actual i mplementation of planned land use development, demographic change, household preferences for housing typ es and locations, the cost of fuel, and the competitiveness of transit relative to driving, which relates to congestion along vehicular commute routes that are not under the City’s jurisdiction, as well as transit provided by agencies other than the City. The feasibility and effectiveness of the mitigation measures i s unknown at this time. The City cannot demonstrate definitively at this time that implementation of these policies would achieve VMT reductions to meet the VMT per capita threshold on an individual project-level, or on a region-wide level. It is possible that projects of any size and makeup and determined to exceed the VMT threshold established under the TIA Guidelines, eve n where the project is consistent with the land uses and policy direction of 80 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

the General Plan. Therefore, t his impact is signifi cant and unavoidable . In order to approve the proposed General Plan Update, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be required.

Facts in Support of Finding
While total VMT per capita in the Clo vis SOI is projected to hav e an overall exceedance of the impact threshold, it is noted that the VMT per capita for residential uses in some areas is projected to be below the impact threshold once all General Plan land uses are implemented. These include some currently developed areas, particularly in the southwest part of the city closer to goods and services, as well as some new development areas in the north and northeast portions of the SOI where mixed- use development is proposed. It is also noted that the VMT per capita for res idential uses in some areas is projected to exceed the impact threshold once all General Plan land uses are implemented.

These include some currently developed areas, but is predominately areas of new development in the northern and southern portion of the city which is generally farther from established services.

As individual land use development projects are implemented consistent with the General Plan, a focused project-specific VMT analysis will determine if the VMT per capita or per employee for that individual project exceed the impact threshold.
- The base y ear VMT screening maps associated with the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines may be used to identify if a project is in a current low VMT area and can be scree ned from VMT analysis.
- For land use projects which are not screened out based on the b ase year VMT mapping, and require further VMT analysis, Figures 3.1 -1 and 3.1 -2 can provide an in dication if a focused VMT analysis for a development project is likely to result in a less -than-significant VMT impact with future development conditions.

VMT per capita is not static, rather it is a very dynamic metric that is affected by many variables specific to an individual project, with land use patterns being one of the most influential variables. It is anticipated that a VMT analysis for most future pro ject proposals would generally fit the VMT per capita expectations illustrated in Figure 3.1-1 and 3.1-2, and many will screen out. However, it is also anticipated tha t there will be future proj ect proposals that do not screen out, and that the VMT analysis will show an exceedance of the threshold. All projects will be required to comply with the policies of the Circulation Element, and implement mitigation measures tha t are relevant and feasible. However, it is anticipated that even with consistency with t he Circulation Element policies, and implementation of mitigation measures, there will be signifi cant and unavoidable impacts associated with development of individual projects that exceed the a pplicable VMT threshold.

General Plan policies and options for mitigation are discussed further below. Overall, this would be a significant impact.

Mitigation Measure
It is anticipated that the development of the General Plan as a whole, as well as ind ividual projects, will not be able to fully mitigate VMT per capita to below thresholds of significance. The following mitigation measures would be required in co njunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in order to mitigate the VMT impacts to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this impact. 81 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

As noted p reviously, VMT reduction depends on factors such as actual implementation of planned land use development, demographic change, household preferences for housing types and locations, the cost of fuel, and the competitiveness of transit relative to driving, which relates to congestion along vehicular commute routes that are no t under the City’s jurisdic tion, as well as trans it provided by agencies other than the City. The feasibility and effectiveness of the mitigation measures is unknown at this time. The Ci ty cannot demonstrate definitively at this time that implementation of these policies would achie ve VMT reductions to meet the VMT pe r capita threshold. With implementation of the Circulation Element policies and the recommende d mitigation measures, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Implement a Commute Trip Reduction Program: The City shall implement a commute trip program applicable to al l or selected employers in th e City of Clovis. The criteria for inclusio n in the commute trip reduction program are to be determined by the City, and could be based on building size, square footage of retail uses above the amount that qualifies to be scree ned out as local -serving, number of potential e mployees and/or other cri teria that are appropriate for participation in the program. The progr am would include the follow ing components that may be applicable for existing land uses and new land use development projects:
• trip reduction targets
• measures to discourage single occupancy vehicles while encouraging alternative modes o f transportation such as carpooling, ridesharing, vanpooling, subsidized transit passes and other benefits, • include a guaranteed ride home for eligible employers, • establish applicable fees and funding mechanisms,
• define monitoring measures and frequency, and strategies for non-compliance.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -2: Support the Implem entation of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) for Focused Areas: The City shall identify focused areas to implement TMAs via public-private partnerships to support the implementation, management and monitoring of transportation demand management (TDM) programs.

Transportation Management Associations are non-profit, member-controlled organizations that provide trans portation services in a particular area, such as a commercial district, mall, medical center or i ndustrial park. They generally consist of area businesses with local government support . TMAs provide an institution al framework for T DM programs and services. They are usually more cost effective than programs managed by individ ual businesses. TMAs allow small employers to provide Commute Trip Reduction services comparable to those offered by large companies. The main goal for TMAs in Clovis would be to maximize the reduction of VMT. Implementation of TMAs may consist of the following:
• Identify focused areas and Specific Plans that would have the density and mix of land uses compatible with multimodal travel and adoptio n of TDM, as well as the potential to enter development and funding agreements with the City for TMA support.
• Provide seed funding and work with applicants to develop service agreements for the development of TMAs.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-3: Provide Bicycle Facilities: The City shall require land uses that generate more than 500 daily trips (which is the threshold that screens small projects from a detailed VMT analysis) to provide bike 82 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

parking, bike lockers, showers, and perso nal lockers. Th is measure is designed to promote commuting by bicycle and support transit first/last mile access. Bicycle facilities shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with each project and funded by the applicant.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-4: Improve Street Connectivity: The City shall require new area plans an d new housing projects to provide a well-connected street network , par ticularly for non -motorized connections. Increased intersection density, alleyways, and mid-block pedestrian crossings may be a proxy for street connectivity and accessibility to connect a variety of land uses . Characteristics of street network connectivity include short block leng ths, numerous three and four -way intersections, and minimal dead -ends (cul -de-sacs). Street connectivi ty helps to fa cilitate shorter vehicle trips and greater numbers of walk and bike trips and thus a reduction in VMT.

2. Transportation and Traffic
Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may resul t in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 perc ent below Baseline conditions).

Finding 2 – The City hereby makes Finding 2 given that, while the Circulation Element policies are expected to help reduce the cumulative VMT, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole. Additionally, the Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use patterns of the General Plan. The following mitigation measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the G eneral Plan in order to mitigate the VMT impact s to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this cumulative impact. Therefore, t his impact is signifi cant and unavoidable . In o rder to approve the proposed General Plan Update, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be required.

Facts in Support of Finding
Cumulative VMT was calculated for the Clovis General Plan area including current city limits and the sphere of influence (SOI). Residential VMT per capita would decrease by 5%, from 16.1 t o 15.3, but would still be above the impact threshold of 14.0. Non -residential VMT per employee would decrease by 18%, from 24.6 to 20.1, and w ould be below the impact threshold of 22.3. VMT is largely a function of land use patterns, and integrated transportation infrastructure.

It is noted that there are some areas of the city with existing, or planned, mixed use developments (housing, retail, offices, and community facilities) that wi ll have reduced VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average , while other areas will ha ve elevated VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average. Implementing the goals and policies from the Cir culation Element are intended to promote ac cessibility, encourage non-vehicle transportation modes, expand transit services, and develop Tra nsportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirements that reduce VMT associated with new development. When imple mented, these types of policies are anticipated to influence social behaviors by presenting a resident/employee with more transportation choices. The more times non-motorized transportation choices are selected as a method of travel, the more reduction in cumulative VMT per capita will be observed within the population.

While these policies are expected to help reduc e the cumulative VMT, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole. 83 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Additionally, the Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use patterns of the General Plan. The following mitigatio n measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in order to mitigate the VMT im pacts to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigatio n measures that would fully mitigate this cumulative impact. This impact will remain significant and unavoidable and cumulatively considerable.

III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS
The following alternatives were determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives with the potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. The alt ernatives are analyzed in detail in the following section.
▪ No Project Alternative
▪ Policy Change Only Alternative
▪ TIA Guidelines Only Alternative
No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative assumes that ther e would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to th e Circulation Element, and the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guideline s supportive of the Circulation Element. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in respo nse to SB 743, b ut would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidance for analyzing VMT.

Finding: The No Project Alternative would be physically feasible but would not be as economi cally feasible as the proposed General Plan Update. The proposed Project more accurately reflects the City’s (including business owners and residents ) fu ture p lanning goals for their communit y. In addition, the Circulation Element Update is needed to reflect recent legislative changes (e.g., SB 743, Complete Streets Act, etc.), the economy and market, and emerging best practices.

Under this alternative there wo uld be no focused update to the General Plan Circulation Element.

The policies of the existing Ci rculation Element would remain unchanged, and the new policies proposed to reduce VMT would not be adopted. Additionally, the Ci ty would not adopt the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element.

This alternative would not create or reduce any physical environmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical d evelopment. However, under this alternative, the City would not be responsive to SB 743, and would no t be establishing VMT thres holds, VMT analysis methodologies, and measures intended to reduce VMT within the city. Instead, new projects would not have a w ell-defined method of analysis and mitigation strategy and inconsistent approaches would be common place.
84 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in slightly higher VMT per capita because there would be no requirement for new projects to implement VMT reduction measures. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

This alternative would not achieve any of the Project objectives as it would not update City Policy in the Circulation Element and would not establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Overall, the No Project Alternative would meet any of the project objectives. Therefore, it has been rejected by the City in favor of the proposed Project.

Policy Change Only Alternative
This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its exis ting General Plan. This would include policy changes to the Circulation Element intended to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743. Under this alternative, the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines suppor tive of the Circulation Element, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the OPR Guidance for analyzing VMT.

Finding: The TIA Guidelines Only Alternative would be physically feasible but would not meet the first or third objective as updates to City Policies and Guidelines would not occur.

This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its existing General Plan , but that there would not be a TIA Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element. This alternative would not create or reduce any physical e nvironmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical development. Under this alternative, the City would be partially responsive to SB 743, in that they would be establishing policies aimed at red ucing VMT within the City. However, there would not b e a well -defined VMT threshold, or VMT analysis methodology. New projects would have some mitigation strategy outlined in the policie s, but would not benefit from a well - defined method of analysis and mi tigation strategy and incon sistent approaches would b e common place.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher. There would also be an inconsistent approach to analysis of VMT.

This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

Nevertheless, this alternative would not be as responsive to the Project objectives as the proposed Project. The propo sed Project more accurately reflects the City’s (including business ow ners and residents) future planning goals for their communit y. Thus, it has been rejected by the City in favor of the proposed Project.

TIA Guidelines Only Alternative
This alternative a ssumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General P lan. There would be no poli cy changes to the Circulation Element, but the City would adopt Tran sportation Impact Analysis Guidelines defining the methodology for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any poli cy changes in response to S B 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT.
85 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Finding: This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan, but that there would be a TIA Guidelines defining the methodolo gy for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis.

This alternative would not create or reduce any physical environmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical d evelopment. Under this alternative, the City would be partially responsive to SB 743, in that the y would be establishing a VMT threshold and consistent approach to analyzing and reducing VMT within the City. However, there would not be new polic y direction from the City to reduce VMT. New projects would have some mitigation strategy outlined in the TIA Guidelines, but would not benefit from the direction provided by policy.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher. There would be an inconsistency between future projects in their approach to reducing VMT, because there is no policy directive requiring VMT reduction. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

Additionally, this alternative would not be as responsive to the Project objectives as the pro posed Project. The proposed Project more accurately reflects the City’s (including business owners and residents) future planning goals for their communit y. Therefore, the City rejects this alternative in favor of the proposed project.

86 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Attachment B

FORM OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

GPA2022-003 & TIA GUIDELINES
2014 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

Introduction
The City of Clovis is the lead agency under CEQA responsible for preparation, review , and certification of the Final EIR for the 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update. As the lead agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action, which of those impacts are significant, and which can be mitigated through imposition of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant. CEQA then requires the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve the proposed project (Project). In making this determination, the City is guided by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, which provides:

CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits , including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining w hether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region- wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a propos ed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse e nvironmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”
When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall st ate in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the F inal EIR and/or other information in the record.

The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.

In addition, Public Resources Code, Section 21081(b), requires that where a public agency finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportuniti es for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of the project. 87 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis 2014 General Plan Circulation Element Update
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City of Clovis has balanced the benefits of the Project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the Project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. The City also has examined alternatives to the Project, none of which both meets the Project objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed Project for the reasons discussed in the Findings and Facts in Support of Findings.

Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
Although nearly all potential Project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated, as described in the Findings and Facts in Support of Findings, there remain two Project impacts for which complete mitigation is not feasible. The impacts and alternatives are described below and were also addressed in the Findings.

The Supplemental EIR (SEIR) identified the following significant unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed Project:

Transportation and Traffic
▪ Impact 3.1-2: General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions).

Year 2042 conditions with the Circulation Element update would result in decreased VMT per capita and VMT per employee in comparison to the 2019 baseline condition in Clovis. Residential VMT per capita would decrease by 5%, from 16.1 to 15.3, but would still be above the impact threshold of 14.0. Non-residential VMT per employee would decrease by 18%, from 24.6 to 20.1, and would be below the impact threshold of 22.3.

The reductions indicate that future development, in particular planned mixed -use development, will provide more opportunities for Clovis residents and employees to access jobs and services within the city and within shorter distances. The short er trip distances reduce VMT by vehicles, and also increase the likelihood that trips will be made by non-auto modes such as bicycling and walking.

In summary, implementation of the General Plan would result in total citywide VMT per capita above applicable thresholds and total citywide VMT per employee below the threshold. VMT per capita or per employee is largely a function of land use patterns, and integrated transportation infrastructure, with some effect specifically attributed to social behaviors/pref erences. These characteristics can vary within a geographic area. For instance, in Clovis several areas of the city have existing, or planned, mixed use developments (housing, retail, offices, and community facilities) that are integrated or proximate to each other. With the land uses being closer in mixed use developments, the trip lengths for residents/employees traveling to work, home, or services is reduced. When you combine a well-planned circulation network that promotes easy access via bicycle, pedestrian and public transit, there are opportunities for further reductions in VMT as a result of choices by some residents/employees to shift their travel to non -motorized travel. Such mixed-use land use patterns tend to have a positive effect when it comes to reducing VMT per capita for people living and working in those areas. To the contrary, several areas of the City have 88 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis 2014 General Plan Circulation Element Update
Statement of Overriding Considerations
existing, or planned, uses that are less mixed, and are more isolated and distant from other uses that serve residents/employees living in the area. The more separated, or isolated, housing is from retail, offices, and community facilities, the greater the trip lengths will be for those individuals. This will result in higher VMT per capita for people living in those areas.

Implementing the goals and policies presented in the proposed Circulation Element and discussed in Chapter 3.1 of the Draft EIR are intended to promote accessibility, encourage non- vehicle transportation modes, expand transit services, and develop TDM program requireme nts that reduce VMT associated with new development. When implemented, these types of policies can influence social behaviors by presenting a resident/employee with more transportation choices. The more times non-motorized transportation choices are selected as a method of travel, the more reduction in VMT per capita will be observed within the population.

While these policies can help to reduce the VMT per capita and VMT per employee, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole. As previously stated, land use patterns are one of the most influential variables affecting VMT per capita. The Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use patterns of the General Plan, rather, it is an accommodative policy document intended to facilitate efficient transportation within the framework of the land use patterns defined in the Land Use Element.

It is anticipated that the development of the General Plan as a whole, as well as individual projects, will not be able to fully mitigate VMT per capita to below thresholds of significance. The following mitigation measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in order to mitigate the VMT impacts to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this impact.

VMT reduction depends on factors such as actual implementation of planned land use development, demographic change, household preferences for housing types and locations, the cost of fuel, and the competitiveness of transit relative to driving, which relates to congestion along vehicular commute routes that are not under the City’s jurisdiction, as well as transit provided by agencies other than the City. The feasibility and effectiveness of the mitigation measures is unknown at this time. The City cannot demonstrate definitively at this time that implementation of these policies would achieve VMT reductions to meet the VMT per capita threshold. Therefore, this would be a significant unavoidable impact.

Cumulative Transportation and Traffic
▪ Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions). the sphere of influence (SOI). Residential VMT per capita would decrease by 5%, from 16.1 to

15.3, but would still be above the impact threshold of 14.0. Non -residential VMT per employee would decrease by 18%, from 24.6 to 20.1, and would be below the impact threshold of 22.3.

VMT is largely a function of land use patterns, and integrated transportation infrastructure. 89 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis 2014 General Plan Circulation Element Update
Statement of Overriding Considerations
It is noted that there are some areas of the city with existing, or planned, mixed use developments (housing, retail, offices, and community facilities) that will have reduced VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average, while other areas will have elevated VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average. Implementing the goals and policies from the Circulation Element are intended to promote accessibility, encourage non -vehicle transportation modes, expand tran sit services, and develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirements that reduce VMT associated with new development. When implemented, these types of policies are anticipated to influence social behaviors by presenting a resident/employee with more transportation choices. The more times non -motorized transportation choices are selected as a method of travel, the more reduction in cumulative VMT per capita will be observed within the population.

While these policies are expected to help red uce the cumulative VMT, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole. Additionally, the Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use patterns of the General Plan. The following mitigation measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in order to mitigate the VMT impacts to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this cumulative impact . Therefore, this would be a significant unavoidable impact.

Alternatives
In addition, the Draft SEIR evaluated the following three alternatives for their potential to avoid or substantially lessen the significant impacts of the proposed Project:
▪ No Project Alternative: This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, and the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the Off ice of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidance for analyzing VMT.
▪ Policy Change Only Alternative: This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its existing General Plan. This would include policy changes to the Circulation Element intended to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743.

Under this alternative, the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT.

In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the OPR Guidance for analyzing VMT.
▪ TIA Guidelines Only Alternative: This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, but the City would adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines defining the methodology for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis. Under this alternative, the City would not 90 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis 2014 General Plan Circulation Element Update
Statement of Overriding Considerations
be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT.

The No Project Alternative would be anticipated to result in slightly higher VMT per capita because there would be no requirement for new projects to implement VMT reduction measures. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project . The Policy Change Only Alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher.

There would also be an inconsistent approach to analysis of VMT . This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project. Similarly, the TIA Guidelines Only Alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher. There would be an inconsistency between futu re projects in their approach to reducing VMT, because there is no policy directive requiring VMT reduction. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

Although each of these alternatives would be physically feasible, none of the m would be as effective in achieving all of the project objectives as the proposed Project. The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the Project objectives as it would not update City Policy in the Circulation Element and would not establish Transportation Impa ct Analysis Guidelines.

Additionally, both the Policy Change Only Alternative and the TIA Guidelines Only Alternative would not be as responsive to the Project objectives as the proposed Project. The proposed Project more accurately reflects the City’s (in cluding business owners and residents) future planning goals for their community. The three alternatives were rejected by the City in favor of the proposed Project.

Overriding Considerations
The City, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed Project, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be considered acceptable due to the followin g specific considerations that outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project, in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guideline Section 15093.

1. Potential fiscal benefits to the City by including a policy to evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in -lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.

2. Reduction in vehicle miles travelled and associated greenhouse gas emissions by providing one new VMT reduction goal and six new VMT reduction policies to the Circulation Element.

3. Consistency with Complete Streets Act and SB 743.

4. Proposed Circulation Element Update goals and policies that address citywide and neighborhood-specific transportation demand and active transportation strategies. 91 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Attachment C

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

This document is the Final Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (FMMRP) for the 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update (Project). This FMMRP has been prepared pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, which requires public agencies to “adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.” A FMMRP is required for the proposed Project because the EIR has identified significant adverse impacts, and measures have been identified to mitigate those impacts.

The numbering of the individual mitigation measures follows the numbering sequenc e as found in the Draft EIR.

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The FMMRP, as outlined in the following table, describes mitigation timing, monitoring responsibilities, and compliance verification responsibility for all mitigation measures identif ied in this Final EIR.

The City will be the primary agency responsible for implementing the mitigation measures and will continue to monitor mitigation measures that are required to be implemented during the operation of the proposed Project.

The FMMRP is presented in tabular form on the following pages. The components of the FMMRP are described briefly below:

Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures are taken from the Draft EIR in the same order that they appear in that document.

Mitigation Timing: Identifies at which stage of the project mitigation must be completed.

Monitoring Responsibility: Identifies the agency that is responsible for mitigation monitoring.

Compliance Verification: This is a space that is available for the monitor to date and initial when the monitoring or mitigation implementation took place.

92 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING

RESPONSIBILITY TIMING VERIFICATION
(DATE/INITIALS)

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact 3.1 -2: General Plan
implementation may result in VMT
metrics that are greater than the
applicable thresholds (13 percent
below Baseline conditions)

Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative
conditions, General Plan
implementation may result in VMT
metrics that are greater than the
applicable thresholds (13 percent
below Baseline conditions)
Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Implement a Commute Trip Reduction Program:

The City shall implement a commute trip program applicable to all or selected employers in the City of Clovis. The criteria for inclusion in the commute trip reduction program are to be determined by the City, and could be based on building size, square footage of retail uses above the amount that qualifies to be screened out as local -serving, number of potential employees and/or other criteria that are appropriate for participation in the program. The program would include the following components that may be applicable for existing land uses and new land use development projects:
 trip reduction targets
 measures to discourage single occupancy vehicles while encour aging alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, ridesharing, vanpooling, subsidized transit passes and other benefits,  include a guaranteed ride home for eligible employers,  establish applicable fees and funding mechanisms,
 define monitoring measures and frequency, and strategies for non - compliance.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -2: Support the Implementation of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) for Focused Areas: The City shall identify focused areas to implement TMAs via public-private partnerships to support the implementation, management and monitoring of transportation demand management (TDM) programs. Transportation Management Associations are non-profit, member -controlled organizations that provide transportatio n services in a particular area, such as a commercial district, mall, medical center or industrial park. They generally consist of area businesses with local government support. TMAs provide an institutional framework for TDM programs and services. They ar e usually more cost effective than programs managed by individual businesses. TMAs allow small employers to provide City of Clovis
Public Works
Department

City of Clovis
Public Works
Department

Over the next
four years, or
prior to the next
comprehensive
General Plan
Update.

Over the next
four years, or
prior to the next
comprehensive
General Plan
Update.

93 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING

RESPONSIBILITY TIMING VERIFICATION
(DATE/INITIALS)
Commute Trip Reduction services comparable to those offered by large companies. The main goal for TMAs in Clovis would be to maximize the reduction of VMT. Implementation of TMAs may consist of the following:
 Identify focused areas and Specific Plans that would have the density and mix of land uses compatible with multimodal travel and adoption of TDM, as well as the potential to enter develop ment and funding agreements with the City for TMA support.
 Provide seed funding and work with applicants to develop service agreements for the development of TMAs.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -3: Provide Bicycle Facilities: The City shall require land uses tha t generate more than 500 daily trips (which is the threshold that screens small projects from a detailed VMT analysis) to provide bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers. This measure is designed to promote commuting by bicycle and support transit first/last mile access. Bicycle facilities shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with each project and funded by the applicant.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -4: Improve Street Connectivity: The City shall require new area plans and new housing projects to provide a well -connected street network, particularly for non -motorized connections. Increased intersection density, alleyways, and mid -block pedestrian crossi ngs may be a proxy for street connectivity and accessibility to connect a variety of land uses.

Characteristics of street network connectivity include short block lengths, numerous three and four -way intersections, and minimal dead -ends (cul -de- sacs). Stre et connectivity helps to facilitate shorter vehicle trips and greater numbers of walk and bike trips and thus a reduction in VMT.

City of Clovis
Planning Dept.
and Public
Works Dept.

City of Clovis
Public Works
Department

Prior to
approval of
individual
projects (i.e. site
plans, tentative
maps, etc.)

Prior to
approval of
individual
projects (i.e. site
plans, tentative
maps, etc.)

94 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

RESOLUTION 22-___

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS TO APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA2022-003 TO AMEND THE 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL

PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT TO INCORPORATE VMT POLICIES

WHEREAS, the City of Clovis, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis CA, 93619, initiated an application for General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2022 -003 to amend the 2014 General Plan to incorporate policy changes to the Circulation Element to incor porate provisions related to the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) traffic impact evaluation criterion (the Project); and

WHEREAS, the initiation of the Project was the result of SB 743 becoming effective on July 1, 2020, at which time the metric by which transportation impacts are assessed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) shifted from a level of service (LOS) based analysis to VMT based analysis; and

WHEREAS, as the City developed guidelines for the implementation of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s 2014 General Plan Circulation Element needed to be updated to be in alignment with the State’s mandates; and

WHEREAS, an update to the Circulation Element was prepared, focusing on policy language additions and modifications that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed Public Hearing on September 22, 2022 to consider the Project, at which time interested persons were given opportunity to comment on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted and recommended that the Council approve the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission’s action wa s forwarded to the City Council for consideration; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed Public Hearing on October 17, 2022 to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendations and to consider the Project; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review and consider the entire Administrative Record relating to the Project, which is on file with the City’s Department of Planning and Development Services, and reviewed and considered those portions of the Attachment 2
95 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Administrative Record determined to be necessary to make an informed decision, including, but not necessarily limited to, the staff report, the written materials submitted with the request, and the verbal and written testimony and other evidence presented during the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AND FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 2022-003 as outlined in Attachment A.

2. The Project satisfies the required findings for approval of a general plan amendment, as follows:

a. The GPA2022-003 is internally consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan.

b. The GPA2022 -003 would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City.

c. There is a compelling reason for the amendment, namely, to incorporate policy language into the Circulation Element to reflect the provisions of SB 743.

3. The basis for the findings is detailed in the October 17, 2022 staff report, which is hereby incorporated by reference, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on _________, 2022, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

96 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

GPA2022-003
Amended Circulation Element Goals & Policies

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

FOCUSED UPDATE
The City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing General Plan. The proposed Project concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan.

The focused General Plan Update does not affect land uses or development patterns, and does not result in any physical development. The key components of the focused General Plan Update include revisions to the goals and policies in the Circulation Element. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form.

GOALS AND POLICIES
Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis adopted a comprehensive General Plan Update on August 28, 2014. Since then, statewide transportation planning requirements have driven the need to amend the Circulation Element portion of the adopted General Plan. As such, the City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing General Plan that concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change fo rm for ease of identifying the proposed text changes.

CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
OVERARCHING GOAL: A comprehensive and well -maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through well-planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.

Goal 1: A context -sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs.

Policy 1.1 Multimodal network. The city shall plan, design, operate, and maintain the tran sportation network to promote safe and convenient travel for all users: pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, freight, and motorists.

Policy 1.2 Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance the comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Policy 1.3 Age and mobility. The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Policy 1.4 Jobs and housing. Encourage infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing, and vice versa, to reduce citywide vehicle miles travel led and effectively utilize the existing transportation infrastructure, as well as promote carpooling whenever possible.

Attachment A 97
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood -serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).

Policy 1.6 Internal circulation. New development shall utilize a grid or modified -grid street pattern.

Areas designated for residential and mixed -use village developments should feature short block lengths of 200 to 600 feet.

Policy 1.7 Narrow streets. The City may permit curb-to-curb dimensions that are narrower than current standards on local streets to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and enhance safety.

Policy 1.8 Network completion. New development shall complete the extension of stub streets planned to connect to adjacent streets, where appropriate.

Goal 2: A roadway network that is well planned, funded, and maintained.

Policy 2.1 Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:

A. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours B. Allow exceptions on a ca se-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
i. Preserving agriculture or open space land
ii. Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood iii. Preserving or creating a pedestrian -friendly environment in Old Town or mixed -use village districts
iv. Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders v. Where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible

Policy 2.2 Multimodal LOS. Monitor the evolution of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standards.

The city may adopt MMLOS standards when appropriate.

Policy 2.3 Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.

Policy 2.4 Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right -of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation. The City shall request the County of Fresno to apply the same requirements in the Clovis planning area.

Policy 2.5 Regional and state roadway funding. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to fund roadway improvements adjacent to and within the City’s Planning Area.

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Development projects shall comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.
98 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program. Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in -lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders. Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Goal 3: A multimodal transportation network that is safe and comfortable in the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1 Traffic calming. Employ traffic -calming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.

Policy 3.2 Neighborhood compatibility. Periodically review and update design standards to ensure that new and redesigned streets are compatible with the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3 Old Town and mixed use village centers. Transportation decisions on local streets in Old Town and mixed-use village centers shall prioritize pedestrians, then bicyclists, then mass transit, then motorists.

Policy 3.4 Road diets. Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.

Policy 3.5 Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or intersection expansions after considering multimodal alternative improvements to non-automotive facilities.

Policy 3.6 Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimi ze traffic levels.

Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.

Policy 3.7 Conflict points. Minimize the number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.

Policy 3.8 Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.

Policy 3.9 Park-once. Encourage “park -once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well-marked access to sidewalks and businesses.

Policy 3.10 Pedestrian access and circulation. Entrances at signalized intersections should p rovide sidewalks on both sides of the entrance that connect to an internal pedestrian pathway to businesses and throughout nonresidential parking lots larger than 50 spaces.

Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and right -of-ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non -motorized transportation.
99 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 3.12 Residential orientation. Where feasible, residential development should face local and collector streets to increase visibility and safety of travelers along the streets, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access.

Goal 4: A well-planned and maintained pedestrian circulation network that promotes increased use of the City’s bicycle, and transit, and pedestrian system facilities in order to reduce that serves as a functional alternative to commuting by single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible car.

Policy 4.1 Bike and transit backbone. The bicycle and transit system should connect Shaw Avenue, Old Town, the Medical Center/R&T Park, and the three Urban Centers.

Policy 4.2 Priority for new bicycle facilities. Prioritize investments in the backbone system over other bicycle improvements.

Policy 4.3 Freeway crossings. Require separate bicycle and pedestrian crossings for new freeway extensions and encourage separate crossings where Class I facilities are planned to cross existing freeways.

Policy 4.4 Bicycles and transit. Coordinate with transit agencies to integrate bicycle access and storage into transit vehicles, bus stops, and activity centers.

Policy 4.5 Transit stops. Improve and maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well -lit, and rider -friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy 4.6 Transit priority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.

Policy 4.7 Bus rapid transit. Plan for bus rapid transit and transit-only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase.

Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents focusing on connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods, parks, trails, and goods and services.

Policy 5.1 Complete street amenities. Upgrade existing stree ts and design new streets to include complete street amenities, prioritizing improvements to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety, consistent with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan and other master plans.

Policy 5.2 Development-funded facilit ies. Require development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan Bicycle Transportation Plan when facilities are in or adjacent to the development.

Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.

Policy 5.4 Homeowner associations. The city may require homeowner associations to maintain pathways and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the homeowner association area. 100
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 5.5 Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity centers and to provide general pedestrian connectivity throughout the city.

Goal 6: Safe and efficient goods movement with minimal impacts on local roads and neighborhoods.

Policy 6.1 Truck routes. Plan and designate truck routes that minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Policy 6.2 Land use. Place industrial and warehousing businesses near freeways and truck routes to minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Goal 7: A regional transportation system that connects Clovis to the San Joaquin Valley region.

Policy 7.1 Clovis Avenue extension. Invest in the extension of Clovis Avenue north to Copper Avenue as funding is available.

Policy 7.2 Right-of-way for future extensions. Coordinate with Fresno Coun ty, the Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to preserve future right-of-way for extending Clovis Avenue north of Copper Avenue to Auberry Road and future State Route 65.

Policy 7.3 San Joaquin River crossing. Collaborate with the Fresno Council of Governments and appropriate agencies to secure a San Joaquin River crossing between State Route 41 and North Fork Road.

Goal 8: Improve and enhance the circulation network in a manner that reduces VMT through improved connectivity by focusing on modes of transportation that promotes the reduction in the use of single- occupancy vehicles whenever possible.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management. Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that promote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, employees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, continue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people betw een residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes. Partner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to improve the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe and efficient travel lanes.

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial. Continue to explore opportunities for increased non-vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education. Explore the feasibil ity of a community outreach and education program that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non - vehicular modes of transportation for commuting and recreation. 101
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Policy 8.6 Employer commute programs. Work with businesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single- occupancy vehicles, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on -site shower facilities, and perks for employees who commute.

102
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Attachment 3
DRAFT
RESOLUTION 22-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS ADOPTING AN

UPDATE TO THE CLOVIS TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES TO

INCORPORATE VMT THRESHOLDS AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

WHEREAS, the City of Clovis established and adopted Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines in conjunction with its adoption of the 2014 Clovis General Plan in August of 2014; and

WHEREAS, SB 743 became effective on July 1, 2020, resulting in a shift in the metric by which transportation impacts are assessed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) from a level of service (LOS) based analysis to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis; and

WHEREAS, the City initiated the process to update the City’s existing TIA Guidelines to establish thresholds and implementation guidance for VMT analysis; and

WHEREAS, the adoption of the TIA Guidelines is allowed by CEQA under Public Resources Code Section 21082 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15022, which specifically authorize public agencies to adopt procedures for implementing provisions of CEQA; and

WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020 Interim TIA Guidelines were adopted by the City Council to satisfy the July 1, 2020 compliance deadline; and

WHEREAS, Final TIA Guidelines have been completed and made available to the public for review (the Project); and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed Public Hearing on September 22, 2022 to consider the Project, at which time interested persons were given opportunity to comment on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted and recommended that the Council approve the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission’s action was forwarded to the City Council for consideration; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed Public Hearing on October 17, 2022 to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendations and to consider the Project; and

WHEREAS, the TIA Guidelines are necessary to provide for the orderly and consistent implementation of the General Plan in accordance with CEQA and SB 743; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review and consider the entire Administrative Record relating to the TIA Guidelines, which is on file with the City’s Department of Planning and Development Services , and reviewed and considered those portions of the 103
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Administrative Record determined to be necessary to make an informed decision, including, but not necessarily limited to, the staff report, the written materials submitted with the request, and the verbal and written testimony and other evidence presented during the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AND FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The updated TIA Guidelines establishing VMT thresholds and implementation guidance are hereby adopted as outlined in Attachment A.

* * * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on October 17, 2022 by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATE: October 17, 2022

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

104
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT

ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
City of Clovis, CA
September 15, 2022

Attachment A
Attachment A
105
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 i
Table of Contents

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Overview of Guidelines .................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Transportation Impact Requirements .............................................................................. 1

1.2.1. SB 743 Requirements .................................................................................................... 1

1.2.2. Local Requirements ...................................................................................................... 2

1.3. Transportation Impact Analysis Reports ........................................................................... 2

1.3.1. CEQA Analysis ............................................................................................................... 3

1.3.2. Local Transportation Analysis ....................................................................................... 3

2. CEQA Analysis Requirements ...................................................................................................... 4

2.1. Land Use Projects ............................................................................................................. 4

2.1.1. Project Screening .......................................................................................................... 4

2.1.2. Significant Impact Thresholds ....................................................................................... 9

2.1.3. VMT Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................ 11

2.1.4. Redevelopment Projects ............................................................................................. 12

2.1.5. Land Use Plans ............................................................................................................ 12

2.1.6. Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 13

2.1.7. Mitigation ................................................................................................................... 13

2.2. Transportation Projects .................................................................................................. 15

2.2.1. Determining Need for Detailed VMT Analysis ............................................................. 15

2.2.2. Thresholds for Transportation Projects ...................................................................... 16

2.2.3. VMT Analysis Methodology and Tools ........................................................................ 16

2.2.4. Mitigation for Transportation Projects ....................................................................... 16

3. Local Transportation Analysis .................................................................................................... 18

3.1. Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 18

3.1.1. Thresholds for LTA Preparation .................................................................................. 18

3.2. Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 19

3.2.1. Coordination with Caltrans ......................................................................................... 19

3.2.2. Coordination with Other Agencies .............................................................................. 19

3.3. Levels of Service ............................................................................................................. 20

3.3.1. Level of Service Methodologies .................................................................................. 20 106
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 ii

3.4. Traffic Analysis Scenarios ............................................................................................... 22

3.4.1. Cumulative Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................ 23

3.5. Traffic Counts ................................................................................................................. 24

3.6. Trip Generation .............................................................................................................. 24

3.7. Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 25

3.8. Approved and Pending Projects ..................................................................................... 26

3.9. Site Access and Circulation ............................................................................................. 26

3.10. Queuing at Study Intersections ...................................................................................... 27

3.11. Traffic Operations Thresholds ........................................................................................ 27

3.12. Analysis Discussion ......................................................................................................... 28

4. Level of Environmental Review ................................................................................................. 29

4.1. General Plan Circulation Element Update ...................................................................... 29

4.2. Environmental Review Scenarios .................................................................................... 29

4.2.1. Project Has Non-Transportation Environmental Impacts ........................................... 29

4.2.2. Project Has Transportation Impacts Only ................................................................... 30

Attachment A: High Quality Transit Areas Map
Attachment B: VMT Screening Maps
Attachment C: VMT-Reducing Transportation Projects
Attachment D: Local Transportation Analysis Report Format Attachment E: General Plan 2042 VMT Maps

107
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 1 1. INTRODUCTION
The Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines document provides guidance to City of Clovis (City) staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the City for the purpose of determining impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are intended to:
• promote conformance with applicable City and State regulations; • provide evaluation consistent with CEQA;
• ensure consistency in preparation of studies by applicants and consultants; and • provide predictability in content for City staff and the public in reviewing studies.

Although these guidelines are intended to be comprehensive, not all aspects of every transportation analysis can be addressed within this framework. City staff reserve the right to use judgement to request exemptions and/or to modify requirements for specific projects at the time of the review application.

1.1. OVERVIEW OF GUIDELINES
Section 1: Introduction summarizes the requirements for transportation analysis.

Section 2: CEQA Analysis Requirements describes the analysis to meet State of California guidelines, in particular analysis of vehicle-miles of travel (VMT).

Section 3: Local Transportation Analysis lists the requirements for transportation evaluation relative to City of Clovis policies.

Section 4: Level of Environmental Review summarizes the environmental documentation that may be appropriate for various types of projects.

1.2. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
The Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines specifically address the requirements of California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) which mandates specific types of CEQA analysis of transportation projects, effective July 1, 2020.

1.2.1. SB 743 Requirements
Prior to implementation of SB 743, CEQA transportation analyses of individual projects typically determined impacts on the circulation system in terms of roadway delay (i.e., congestion) and/or capacity usage at specific locations, such as street intersections or freeway segments. Senate Bill 743, signed into law in September 2013, requires changes to the guidelines for CEQA transportation analysis. The changes include the elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining transportation 108
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 2 impacts. The purpose of SB 743 is to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.

Under SB 743, a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact under CEQA. Therefore, LOS and other similar vehicle delay or capacity metrics may no longer serve as transportation impact metrics for CEQA analysis. The California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) updated the CEQA Guidelines and provided a technical advisory (December 2018), which recommends vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts under CEQA. The California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the CEQA Guidelines including the Guidelines section implementing SB 743. The changes have been approved by the Office of the Administrative Law and took effect on July 1, 2020.

1.2.2. Local Requirements
It shall be noted that revisions to CEQA transportation analysis requirements do not preclude the application of local general plan policies, municipal and zoning codes, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements through a city’s planning approval process to ensure adequate operation of the transportation system in terms of transportation congestion measures related to vehicular delay and roadway capacity. As such, the City of Clovis continues to apply congestion- related transportation impact analysis and conditions or requirements for land development projects through planning approval processes outside of the CEQA Guidelines in order to continue implementation of Clovis General Plan policies.

The City’s adopted 2014 General Plan Circulation Element includes a LOS standard. In order to ensure that a project is consistent with the General Plan policy, a LOS analysis may be required at the request of the City Engineer to determine necessary roadway infrastructure improvements and capacity. Any improvements necessary to ensure LOS standards are met may be required as part of the project entitlement. These requirements are discussed in Section 3, Local Transportation Analysis.

1.3. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORTS
This document provides guidance for the two types of analysis that normally comprise a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) report:

1. CEQA Analysis

2. Local Transportation Analysis
Not all projects will require all components of a CEQA analysis and a local transportation analysis.

For example, a project could meet the screening criteria for being located in a high-quality transit area and be exempt from the preparation of a detailed CEQA VMT analysis. Such a project may only be required to provide a local transportation analysis. Conversely, a project may require a VMT 109
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 3 analysis, but not necessarily require a local transportation analysis. Thus, the final scope of the Transportation Impact Analysis would need to be determined by the City.

1.3.1. CEQA Analysis
A CEQA analysis of transportation impacts consists of evaluation measures including conflicts with circulation policies, VMT, hazards, and emergency access. The quantitative methodology, significance thresholds, and mitigation measures for conducting the transportation analysis in accordance with the requirements of SB 743 are primarily based on VMT metrics. The CEQA analysis is part of the environmental review process and must meet CEQA requirements.

1.3.2. Local Transportation Analysis
The City can require that local non-CEQA analysis address traffic operations, safety issues and needed project design features related to a proposed land use project, as well as analyze site access and internal circulation. The local transportation analysis may be used to assess transportation impacts in relation to the City’s policies in the General Plan and other planning documents.

110
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 4 2. CEQA ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
This section discusses the requirements for conducting analyses for projects under environmental review, consistent with requirements from SB 743. Under CEQA, a lead agency has the authority to determine its own significance thresholds and methodologies for technical analysis, taking into account its own development patterns, policy goals and context. Lead agencies can make their own specific decisions regarding methodology and thresholds, presuming their choices are supported by substantial evidence.

The CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist Form identifies the following four impact types for transportation:
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) (requirement to use VMT)?
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric feature or incompatible uses?
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Consistent with State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, the City of Clovis has adopted thresholds of significance to determine when a project will have a significant transportation impact based on VMT. The City has developed screening criteria to streamline the analysis for projects that meet certain criteria, referred to as Project Screening, as further described below in Section 2.1.1.

2.1. LAND USE PROJECTS
This section provides information for analyzing individual land use projects, including the process to aid in deciding if a detailed VMT analysis is needed for a land use project. Figure 1 presents a flow chart depicting how a land use project would be analyzed under VMT-based metrics.

2.1.1. Project Screening
A project will require a detailed VMT analysis unless it meets at least one of the City’s five screening criteria:

1. Small projects

2. Provision of affordable housing

3. Local-serving retail

4. Project located in a High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)

5. Project located in low VMT area
111
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 5 Figure 1: Land Use Projects VMT Analysis
Figure 2 presents a chart depicting how a land use project would be analyzed under the proposed screening criteria. A project that meets at least one of the screening criteria could have a less-than- significant VMT impact due to project or location characteristics.

112
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 6 Figure 2: Land Use Projects Screening Criteria Flow Chart

113
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 7 2.1.1.1. Small Projects
Projects that generate or attract fewer than 500 vehicle trips per day are presumed to cause a less- than-significant VMT impact. Projects that typically generate 500 vehicle daily trips are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Sample Small Projects (less than 500 daily trips) Land Use Type Number of Units/ Square Feet
Single Family Residential 53 Dwelling Units
Townhome/Attached Residential 68 Dwelling Units
Retail 13,250 SF
Light Industrial 100,800 SF
Note: calculated trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition.

2.1.1.2. Affordable Housing
Affordable housing is designated as housing for sale or for rent below market rate. Residential projects in high quality transit areas with a high proportion of affordable housing are presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact. Projects can only be screened out if they are located in an area supported by a quality walking and biking network with nearby retail and employment opportunities. If a project contains less than 100 percent affordable housing, the portion that is affordable should be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis.

2.1.1.3. Local-Serving Retail and Public Facilities
Projects that are local-serving retail with 100,000 square feet gross floor area or less are presumed to have a less-than-significant impact. This applies to the entirety of a retail project; for a mixed-use project, this screening criteria should be applied to the retail/commercial component separately to determine if that portion of the project screens out of a detailed VMT analysis.

The determination of local-serving retail is based on location, the characteristics of the project and the vicinity of the site, as well as the envisioned goods and services the retail development would provide. Generally, local-serving retail primarily provides goods and services that most people need on a regular basis and be located close to where people live. Groceries, medicines, fast food and casual restaurants, fitness and beauty services are typical goods and services provided by local- serving retail centers.

The City may require that a project applicant provide a market analysis to demonstrate that the project meets the characteristics of a local-serving retail development based on the goods and services provided relative to the geographic location, the customer base, and other nearby retail uses.
114
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 8 Public services (e.g., police, fire stations, public utilities, neighborhood parks1) do not generally generate substantial amounts of trips and VMT. Instead, these land uses are often built to support other nearby land uses (e.g., office and residential). Therefore, these land uses can be presumed to have less-than-significant impacts on VMT. However, this presumption would not apply if the project is sited in a location that requires employees or visitors to travel substantial distances and may require a detailed VMT analysis.

2.1.1.4. High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)
Projects that are located in a high-quality transit area would not require a detailed VMT analysis.

However, this presumption does not apply if the project:
• has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• includes substantially more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City (per Section 9.32.040 of the Municipal Code) such that it discourages use of alternative modes (transit, biking, walking) by promoting auto ownership and making driving very convenient;
• is inconsistent with the applicable Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as determined by the City; or • replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units.

A map of the existing High-Quality Transit Areas in the city is provided in Attachment A.

2.1.1.5. Project Located in Low VMT Areas
Residential and employment projects that are proposed in areas that generate VMT below adopted City thresholds are presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact and thus can be screened out. The City provides screening maps based on transportation analysis zones (TAZs) and results from the travel model maintained by the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). The following types of projects may be screened out of detailed VMT analysis using these criteria:
• Residential projects proposed in TAZs with total daily resident-based VMT per capita that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County • Office or the employment portions of other non-residential uses with total daily employee-based VMT per employee that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County
The TAZs that fall into these categories are shown in green in the maps provided in Attachment B.

1 For the purpose of conducting VMT analyses, neighborhood parks are defined as typically including playground equipment, playfields, and picnic facilities; ranging in size of up to 30 acres; and serving as social and recreational focal points for neighborhoods.
115
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 9 2.1.1.6. Consistency with RTP/SCS
If a proposed project is inconsistent with the adopted Fresno COG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), the City will evaluate whether that inconsistency may result in a significant impact on transportation. Therefore, projects that are inconsistent with the RTP/SCS would not qualify for screening out of a detailed VMT analysis.

2.1.2. Significant Impact Thresholds
For projects which do not meet any of the screening criteria, the City of Clovis has adopted VMT thresholds for land use development based on a review of long-range plans and policies for the City and for the metropolitan planning organization for the region, Fresno COG. Fresno COG has set a goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 13 percent per capita by 2035 as a target for the Fresno region4. The intent of SB 743 is to bring CEQA transportation analyses into closer alignment with other statewide policies regarding GHG, complete streets, and smart growth. Therefore, using a threshold of 13 percent below average VMT for residential and office projects is consistent with established regional GHG emission goals.

The OPR technical advisory recommends comparing a project’s estimated VMT per capita or VMT per employee to average values on a regional or citywide basis. For retail projects, total VMT within the area affected by the project is measured.

The significance thresholds and specific VMT metrics used to indicate a significant transportation impact are described by land use type in Table 2 .

4 SB 375 Greenhouse Emission Reduction Target for the Fresno County Region, Fresno Council of Governments, April 25, 2017.
116
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 10 Table 2: Impact Thresholds by Land Use Type
Land Use Type Impact Threshold
Residential A proposed project exceeding a level of 13
percent below existing average VMT per capita
in Fresno County.

Regional Average: 16.1 VMT/capita
Impact Threshold: 14.1 VMT/capita
Office A proposed project exceeding a level of 13
percent below existing average VMT per
employee in Fresno County.

Regional Average: 25.6 VMT/employee
Impact Threshold: 22.3 VMT/employee
Retail A net increase in total VMT. The total VMT for
the region without and with the project is
calculated. The difference between the two
scenarios is the net change in total VMT that is
attributable to the project.

Other land uses The City will make a determination of the applicable thresholds on a case-by-case basis
based on the land use type, project description,
and setting. Research and development,
medical offices, assisted living, and industrial
projects may be evaluated similar to office
projects using the VMT per employee metric.

Projects such as religious institutions, regional
parks, hotels, private schools and medical
offices may be evaluated using the net VMT
criteria similar to retail projects.

Mixed-Use Projects Evaluate each component of a mixed-use project independently and apply the
significance threshold for each land use type.

Alternatively, the evaluation would apply only
to the project’s dominant use.
117
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 11 2.1.3. VMT Analysis Methodology
Projects that do not meet the screening criteria must include a detailed evaluation of the VMT generated by the project.

2.1.3.1. Regional Average VMT
Regional average VMT per capita and VMT per employee values are determined using the Fresno COG travel model. The travel model is a set of mathematical procedures and equations that represent the variety of transportation choices that people make, and how those choices result in trips on the transportation network. The Fresno COG travel model is an activity-based model that simulates the County’s population, based on detailed Census data, and models the daily activity patterns of each simulated individual along with resulting travel demand. The OPR guidelines recommend using an activity or tour-based approach for VMT whenever possible.

The daily activity patterns in the travel model are based on a statistical analysis of a household travel survey, where a representative sample of households were asked to track all daily activities and trips by all members of their household. A simulated travel tour might consist of, for example, travel from the home to the gym to work to supermarket to home in a typical weekday. The travel model was calibrated to these surveyed travel patterns, and also validated by its ability to replicate counted traffic volumes, transit ridership, and total Fresno County VMT from the Highway Performance Measurement System (HPMS) which is based on traffic counts.

The VMT per capita includes all trips made by residents, including their trips while away from home, but does not include trips visiting residences (e.g., trips made by delivery vans). The regional average VMT per capita is calculated by summing the vehicle mileage (excluding trips made by transit, bicycle or walking) for all trips made by Fresno County residents, and dividing by the county population.

The VMT per employee includes trips made by employees to and from their workplaces, including trips to and from points other than the employees’ homes, but does not include visitors to the employment sites. The regional average VMT per employee is calculated by summing the vehicle mileage (excluding trips made by transit, bicycle or walking) for all trips made by Fresno County employees, and dividing by the total number of employees in the county.

2.1.3.2. VMT per Capita or per Employee
For residential or employment land uses where VMT per capita or VMT per employee are used to determine impacts, the following analysis methods are available:
• The VMT per capita or VMT per employee may be looked up using the latest screening maps (Attachment B) and the TAZ (or TAZs) containing the project site. • If the value for the TAZ is zero or significantly different compared to the values in surrounding TAZs due to a lack of land use data in the existing condition for the project 118
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 12 TAZ, the City may allow the VMT per capita or VMT per employee to be based on an average of surrounding adjacent TAZs.
• If a proposed project affects the balance of residential and non-residential land uses in an area and is a relatively large project, it is recommended that the Fresno COG model be rerun to include the proposed project, and that the VMT per capita and VMT per employee be recalculated.

2.1.3.3. Exclusion of Truck VMT
It shall be noted that SB 743 does not apply to goods movement (i.e., trucks). Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines states that VMT for transportation impacts refers to “… the amount and distance of automobile travel…”. Therefore, the VMT associated with trucks and the movement of goods is not required to be analyzed and mitigated for the evaluation of transportation impacts under CEQA. Projects that generate a substantial amount of truck traffic also generate automobile trips, and project-related automobile trips would be subject to VMT analysis and mitigation. The VMT for all vehicles, including heavy trucks related to a project, will still be calculated as input for air quality, GHG, noise and energy impact analyses to be evaluated in non-transportation parts of the environmental analysis. The local transportation analysis requires an evaluation of truck traffic in terms of roadway and intersection operations, as discussed in Section 3.

2.1.4. Redevelopment Projects
If a redevelopment project replaces active land uses and results in a net decrease in overall VMT, it may be presumed that the project would result in a less-than-significant impact.

If a project replaces existing active uses and leads to a net overall increase in VMT compared to the previous uses, then the thresholds for the new land uses should apply. If net VMT increases, then the appropriate VMT metrics and thresholds should be applied. For example, if a residential project replaces an office use resulting in a net increase in VMT, then the project’s VMT per capita should be compared with the thresholds for residential projects. If the project is a mixed-use project, then the recommended approach for analyzing mixed-use projects should be applied to analyze each individual use.

2.1.5. Land Use Plans
For land use plans such as specific plans, community plans, and general plan updates, consistent with OPR’s recommendations, the City requires comparing the applicable VMT thresholds (such as VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee) described in Section 2.1.3 under existing conditions with the applicable VMT metrics for the expected horizon year for the land use plan. If there is a net increase in the applicable VMT metrics under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact.
119
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 13 2.1.6. Cumulative Impacts
Per Section 15064 (h) (1) of the CEQA code, “when assessing whether a cumulative effect requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the lead agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable.” Generally, an analysis of cumulative impacts falls under two categories:

1. VMT per capita or per employee

2. Total VMT
These are described below.

2.1.6.1. VMT per Capita or per Employee
For land uses evaluated under an efficiency metric (VMT per capita for residential or VMT per employee for office/employment), if a project falls below the threshold, it would also result in less- than-significant cumulative impacts. In other words, a project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold would have no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact.

2.1.6.2. Total VMT
For land uses evaluated using total VMT (e.g., retail, hotels, etc.), when absolute VMT metrics (such as total VMT recommended for retail and transportation projects) are used, a cumulative VMT impact analysis may be appropriate. Projects must demonstrate consistency with the City of Clovis General Plan to address cumulative impacts. A determination for consistency with the General Plan or RTP/SCS would be made by the City Engineer and based on factors such as density, design and consistency with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. Inconsistencies may be identified if the proposed land use quantities are beyond the designation for the project site in the General Plan or RTP/SCS, in which case the project may result in higher VMT compared to the applicable plan.

If a project is consistent with the General Plan or RTP/SCS, it will be considered as part of the cumulative condition to meet the General Plan’s long-range transportation goals, and therefore will result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact. If a project is not consistent with the General Plan, a cumulative impact analysis will be required to determine if the project would result in a net increase in VMT.

2.1.7. Mitigation
If a project would result in significant impacts, CEQA requires feasible mitigation measures to be implemented to reduce or mitigate an impact. Mitigation includes5:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action

5 According to CEQA code Section 15370
120
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 14 (b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation
(c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment (d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action
(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments, including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements
For VMT impacts, a combination of measures from several VMT reduction strategies may be implemented: project characteristics, multimodal improvements, parking, and Transportation Demand Management (TDM). VMT is reduced by implementing strategies that reduce the number of automobile trips generated by the project, shift more trips from automobile to non-automobile modes, and/or reduce the distances that people drive. Generally, these reductions can best be achieved by the implementation of TDM strategies.

TDM strategies are designed to change travel behavior in order to reduce the demand for vehicle travel and increase the overall efficiency of a local or regional transportation system. This is accomplished by encouraging mode shifts away from the Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) and auto trips away from peak periods. TDM strategies typically involve some form of incentives for employers and residents in order to reduce driving and encourage transit, walking, biking, and carpooling. These incentives can include, but are not limited to, supplying transit passes, rideshare programs, parking cash out, and guaranteed ride home programs. The implementation of TDM measures outcomes include increased transit use and non-motorized travel, reduced VMT, reduced roadway congestion, and reduced parking demand.

Measures to reduce VMT have been documented by several sources. Sources most commonly referenced include the California Air Resources Board (CARB) list of transportation and land use strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions;6 the California Pollution Control Offices Association (CAPCOA) report on quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures;7 and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Mobility Management VMT Reduction Calculator Tool – Design Document8. The City recommends the use of these sources to select and apply mitigation measures and appropriate VMT reductions. The project applicant will be required to provide

6 https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/policies.htm 7 California Pollution Control Officers Association, Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity, 2021. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Final%20Handbook_AB434.pdf 8 https://www.icommutesd.com/docs/default-source/planning/vmt-reduction-calculator- tool_final.xlsx?sfvrsn=4b21b67b_4
121
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 15 evidence for identifying specific values for mitigations to demonstrate the quantification in reduction of VMT to a level that would be less than significant.

Projects for which impacts are determined to be significant are required to propose a list of VMT reduction measures and document the associated percentage of VMT reduction supported by substantial evidence. Project VMT is calculated by applying the percentage in reduction. Project VMT is then compared to the threshold of significance to evaluate the project’s CEQA transportation impact. The City will review and approve the proposed mitigation and the calculated percentage in VMT reduction.

VMT mitigation fees, mitigation banks, and mitigation exchange programs are potential future methods for handling mitigation. Cities have been exploring the establishment of programs such as mitigation banking and VMT exchanges. VMT exchange banks allow program-level mitigation to take place for projects located in high-VMT areas where mitigation at the project level alone may not be effective. A considerable amount of effort is needed to set up these types of fee programs, which are implemented in advance and independent of the environmental review for a specific land development project. As a first step, the City will need to identify mitigation strategies that are feasible for the City or individual projects to implement. This can include determining the physical feasibility of infrastructure projects or determining the implementation feasibility of programs that would contribute to development of regional pedestrian, bicycle/scooter, and transit projects and possibly TDM actions aimed at changing travel behavior.

2.2. TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
This section provides information for analyzing transportation projects on roads within the City’s jurisdiction.

2.2.1. Determining Need for Detailed VMT Analysis
The City of Clovis requires an analysis of transportation projects if they are expected to increase VMT, primarily projects that encourage the use of single-occupancy automobile such as the addition of through travel lanes. However, transportation projects that have already been specifically analyzed in a citywide plan (such as a General Plan update) may be exempt from a detailed VMT analysis. This exemption may be granted if the necessary VMT analysis and potential mitigations have already been calculated and identified at the plan level.

Conversely, projects that would likely not lead to an increase in vehicle travel and which promote use of transit and active transportation, should not require a VMT analysis. Project types that would likely not lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel and generally should not require a VMT analysis include:
• road rehabilitation
• safety projects
• auxiliary lanes less than one mile in length
122
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 16 • turning lanes
• conversion to managed or transit lanes
• road diets
• removal or relocation of parking spaces
• addition of non-motorized, transit, and active transportation facilities A full list is provided in Attachment C.

This approach is consistent with the intent of SB 743 in that it streamlines VMT-reducing projects and thoroughly assesses and mitigates, as appropriate, projects that have the potential to increase VMT.

2.2.2. Thresholds for Transportation Projects
Transportation projects that have already been included and evaluated in the General Plan or the RTP/SCS are presumed to have a less-than-significant impact.

For projects that have not been included in the General Plan or RTP/SCS or are modifications and replacements, any growth in VMT attributable to the transportation project could result in a significant impact. For example, a transportation project that replaces a project included in the General Plan and would generate less VMT compared to the project included in the General Plan would have a less than significant impact. Projects not included in the General Plan or RTP/SCS would have a significant impact if they cause a net increase in VMT.

2.2.3. VMT Analysis Methodology and Tools
For transportation projects (e.g., those that increase vehicular throughput or are not included in a citywide plan) that require a detailed VMT analysis, the City should require analysis using the most current travel demand model (i.e., Fresno COG model) to estimate changes to citywide VMT due to rerouted trips. To capture long-term effects, an induced demand assessment using the following formula should be required:
[% increase in lane miles] x [existing VMT] x [elasticity] = [VMT resulting from the project] The City requires total VMT in the city as the appropriate VMT metric, with the impact threshold being any increase in total VMT. The analysis shall be performed for the long-range horizon year, normally 20 years from project completion. This approach would discourage induced demand impacts by requiring that a baseline level of VMT in the city not be exceeded.

2.2.4. Mitigation for Transportation Projects
Mitigation measures for transportation projects generally seek to reduce VMT by discouraging single- passenger automobile travel or through funding TDM measures. The following potential mitigation measures for transportation projects are listed as examples for consideration:
123
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 17 • Tolling new lanes to encourage carpooling and fund transit improvements • Converting existing general-purpose lanes to HOV or HOT lanes • Implementing or funding off-site travel demand management • Implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) strategies to improve passenger throughput on existing lanes
The City may pursue other mitigation measures supported by substantial evidence.

124
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 18 3. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

3.1. PURPOSE
A local transportation analysis (LTA) may be required for land use projects, in addition to the CEQA analysis, to evaluate the effects of a development project on the circulation network, primarily on local access and circulation in the proximity of a project site. The LTA ensures that the project provides safe connections for cyclists, pedestrians, and transit users. This analysis is required to address operational and safety potential issues for all transportation modes, and to identify improvements needed with project implementation and consistent with City policies.

These guidelines are provided to establish general procedures and requirements for the preparation of LTAs associated with development within the city of Clovis. The City recognizes that every development project and analysis context is unique. Therefore, emphasis is placed on the term “guidelines,” and not every aspect of the guideline is necessarily applicable to all projects.

These guidelines are intended as a checklist for analysis preparers to ensure common analysis items are not overlooked. They are not intended to be prescriptive to the point of eliminating professional judgment.

3.1.1. Thresholds for LTA Preparation
Unless waived by the City Engineer, an LTA will be required by the City to adequately assess the impacts of development projects on the existing and/or planned street system when the following thresholds are met:

1. When project-generated traffic is expected to be greater than 100 vehicle trips during any peak hour

2. When a project includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA) which changes the use to a designation that has a potential to generate a higher number of vehicle trips than the existing, or originally planned land use designation

3. When the project traffic will substantially affect an intersection or roadway segment already identified as operating at an unacceptable level of service

4. When the project will substantially change the offsite transportation system or connection to it, as determined by the City Engineer
An LTA requires updating when two or more years with no activity have passed since the preparation of the analysis. After two years with no activity, an LTA is considered antiquated and irrelevant. For cases in which a master LTA was prepared for a large development, the specific phases will generally not require supplemental analyses if the master LTA analyzed the large development in phases and the specific phases are consistent with the master LTA. 125
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 19 3.2. STUDY AREA
The intersections and roadway segments to be covered by the LTA will be determined on a case-by- case basis and shall be sufficient in size to include existing and planned streets and intersections that may be impacted by the proposed development. The scope of the LTA, including the study area, proposed trip distribution, and trip generation, shall be reviewed and approved by the Traffic Engineering Manager or designee prior to preparation of the study.

The following guidelines determine the extents of the study area for local transportation analysis:
• Pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities within a half-mile distance from the project site boundary
• All intersections of major streets that would provide direct access to the project • All signalized intersections within one-half mile of the project site boundary where the project would add 50 or more peak hour trips, and signalized intersections beyond one- half mile where the project would add 100 or more peak hour trips • All unsignalized intersections within a half-mile of the project site boundary where the project would add more than 50 peak hour trips
Local transportation analyses shall provide sufficient detail regarding existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. This could include identification of deficient facilities, existing and planned bicycle facilities, and existing and planned transit routes and facilities.

3.2.1. Coordination with Caltrans
The LTA and/or City staff shall consult with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to determine traffic impacts on Caltrans’ State facilities. This consultation should include a request to Caltrans for their concurrence with the scope of analysis for Caltrans’ State facilities, or a recommendation from Caltrans for specific modifications to the scope. This analysis must follow the most current Caltrans guidance to analyze transportation impacts from development projects on the State highway system. The consultation should also include a review of recommendations to reduce any impacts to Caltrans’ State facilities.

3.2.2. Coordination with Other Agencies
The LTA preparer and/or City staff shall consult with the City of Fresno and/or Fresno County to determine the levels of significance with regard to traffic impacts on Fresno or County roadway facilities. Correspondence with the neighboring agencies shall be provided to the City Engineering Department.

If a consultant is performing work in an adjacent agency and is analyzing circulation and transportation facilities and infrastructure within one mile of the City of Clovis sphere of influence, City of Clovis City Engineer should be contacted for review of the scope of work, as well as receive a completed document for comment.
126
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 20 3.3. LEVELS OF SERVICE
All city intersections and roadway segments shall operate at a LOS D or better under the near-term conditions, unless a finding of overriding consideration was adopted in the General Plan EIR. Under long-term conditions, all city intersections and roadway segments shall operate at a LOS D or better, except for the roadway segments adopted in the General Plan EIR to operate at LOS E or F.

Exceptions to this standard may be allowed on a case-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
• Preserving agriculture or open space land
• Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood • Preserving or creating a pedestrian-friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts
• Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders • Where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible

3.3.1. Level of Service Methodologies
The LOS shall be based on average delay for signalized and unsignalized intersections and service volume tables (such as those prepared by the Florida Department of Transportation) for roadway segments. Average delay for study intersections shall be summarized in a table. The traffic analysis methodologies for the facility types indicated below will be accepted without prior consultation:

3.3.1.1. Signalized Intersections
Analysis of signalized intersections shall use the most current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) using Synchro, Vistro, Highway Capacity Software (HCS), or other software approved by the City Traffic Engineer.

The procedures in the Highway Capacity Manual do not explicitly address operations of closely spaced signalized intersections. Under such conditions, several unique characteristics must be considered, including spill-back potential from the downstream intersection to the upstream intersection, effects of downstream queues on upstream saturation flow rate, and unusual platoon dispersion or compression between intersections. An example of such closely spaced operations is signalized ramp terminals at urban interchanges. Queue intersections between closely spaced intersections may seriously distort the procedures in the HCM. In this case, simulation of the study area may be necessary, as determined by the City Engineer.

3.3.1.2. Unsignalized Intersections
Analysis of unsignalized intersections shall use the most current edition of the HCM and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) using Synchro, Vistro, HCS, or other software approved by the City Engineer.
127
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 21 3.3.1.3. Signal Warrants
Analysis of signal warrants shall apply the current MUTCD Signal Warrants.

3.3.1.4. Roundabouts
The SIDRA software may be used for the analysis of individual roundabouts, However, the SIDRA software does not account for the chaining of two roundabouts and the queues associated between the roundabouts. Simulation with proper assumptions is the only way to ensure this analysis is performed correctly. The consultant shall discuss methodology with City staff prior to performing the work for roundabout analysis. The consultant will need a conceptual design of the roundabout for the analysis. The analysis should reflect United States and Clovis/Fresno driver behavior.

3.3.1.5. LOS Analysis Default Values
While the City of Clovis does not officially advocate the use of any software, Synchro is the software used by City staff. The analysis shall use the latest published version of the HCM. The LOS analysis at study intersections shall be conducted using the following default values as applicable:
• Use of signal timing plans, if available. If not available, then:
o Minimum split time for protected left-turn phase shall not be less than 12 seconds.
o Minimum pedestrian times should be satisfied on all phases with pedestrian phase for signals modeled as coordinated signals.
o For study intersections modeled as actuated uncoordinated signals, the intersections shall be evaluated with at least 10 pedestrian calls per hour in the Existing plus Project and Long-Range conditions, if pedestrian projections are not available.
o If existing cycle lengths are available, they should be utilized. In instances where existing cycle lengths are not available, LOS calculations should be conducted using the natural cycle lengths. The cycle lengths should remain constant for comparison purposes, unless the project is changing the character of the intersection and it is noted in the report.
o In instances where signalized intersections are coordinated, coordinated cycle lengths should be determined based on the natural cycle lengths of the coordinated signals and shall be used for evaluation purposes. o Minimum All-Red time(s) shall equal 1.0 seconds (2.0 seconds when dual left turn lanes are used).
o Minimum Yellow time shall equal 3.5 seconds, or greater based on the approach speeds (3.0 seconds for left turn phases).
• Where existing traffic volumes are collected and peak hour factors are available, then LOS calculations for Existing Condition scenarios and the Near-Term scenarios should use available counted peak hour factors, provided that the traffic counts are included in 128
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 22 the Appendix. For all Cumulative scenarios and Existing Conditions where peak hour factors are not available, default factors per the HCM shall be used and shall be consistent throughout the Cumulative scenarios and peak hours. • Existing storage lengths shall be entered as input data. • All assumptions and defaults used shall have proper citation and justification for their use in the LTA.

3.4. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The following scenarios shall be included in the LTA:

A. For projects requiring a General Plan Amendment, intersection LOS analysis and calculation worksheets, as well as figures showing turning volumes and lane configurations, shall be included in the report for the following traffic scenarios:
a) Existing Conditions – Current year traffic volumes and peak hour LOS analysis b) Existing plus Project Conditions – Trip generation and trip distribution added to the previous scenario and LOS analysis
c) Near-Term Analysis (Existing plus Approved and Pending Projects plus Proposed Project Conditions) – Trip generation and trip distribution for Approved and Pending projects added to the previous scenario and LOS analysis
d) Cumulative Long-Range Conditions without Project – Long-Range conditions (20 years from existing conditions and/or consistent with the horizon year available from the Fresno COG model)
e) Cumulative Long-Range Conditions with Project – Project traffic added to the previous scenario
f) If any phasing is to take place, then such phasing should be studied at its appropriate build out year in addition to the above scenarios.
g) Trip traces to affected Caltrans freeway interchanges shall be performed for the current General Plan land use and the land use proposed per the GPA.

B. For projects with planned land uses consistent with the General Plan, intersection LOS analysis and calculation worksheets, as well as figures showing turning volumes, shall be included in the report for the following traffic scenarios:
a) Existing Conditions – Current year traffic volumes and peak hour LOS analysis b) Existing plus Project Conditions – Trip generation and trip distribution added to the previous scenario and LOS analysis
c) Near-Term Analysis (Existing plus Approved and Pending Projects plus Proposed Project Conditions) – Trip generation and trip distribution for Approved and Pending projects added to the previous scenario and LOS analysis
d) If any phasing is to take place, then such phasing should be studied at its appropriate build out year in addition to the above scenarios.
129
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 23 e) Trip distribution to affected Caltrans freeway interchanges shall be performed for the proposed project.
"No Project" scenarios do not require analyses for improvements. For the proposed project, no physical improvements shall be assumed to be implemented unless there is a Capital Improvement Project already identified and fully funded. If the improvement is identified in an impact fee program and the improvement is fully funded, then that improvement can be assumed under Cumulative Analysis scenarios. However, the “project” may be conditioned with constructing the assumed improvement.

3.4.1. Cumulative Traffic Volumes
Cumulative Long-Range Conditions traffic volumes shall be projected based on the method documented by the Fresno COG model steering committee using procedures such as the increment method. The methodology for developing the forecasts shall be clearly documented in the report. Information from Fresno COG model runs shall be included in the Appendix.

The following scenarios shall be requested from the Fresno COG model to perform this forecasting correctly:
• Current Year Model Run (Existing Conditions Model),
• Cumulative Long-Range No Project Model Run (Cumulative Conditions Model), • Cumulative Long-Range Project SelectZone FRATAR
• 9 Model Run, and
• Near-Term Opening Year Model Run, if necessary.

In order to correctly use the model to forecast Cumulative volumes, consultants should contact Fresno COG staff and/or review the Fresno COG webpage.

Consultants should work with Fresno COG staff or approved consultants to prepare a model scope of work request for a basic LTA, and if the analysis is more involved, it may need additional information. The minimum will include reviewing the existing land uses assumed in the model; potentially splitting the TAZs as necessary to more accurately reflect driveways and land uses; and reviewing roadway circulation in the model near the project site. If the consultant is not familiar with the Fresno COG model and the assumptions and information that went into validating the model, the consultant is encouraged to schedule time with the Fresno COG staff to become an expert on the model as the information provided from the model is the basis for the analysis. The consultant will be accountable for the information provided by Fresno COG.

9 FRATAR factoring method to ensure that the model represents Project daily and peak hour trips consistent with independent trip generation estimates.
130
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 24 The consultant should also provide, in the Appendix, the request for modeling services and the response provided by Fresno COG or modeling consultant when the data is returned. An email response from staff is sufficient.

All assumptions shall have proper citation and justification for their use in the LTA.

3.5. TRAFFIC COUNTS
Traffic counts should be collected and included in the Appendix. Available existing counts can be used if they are less than twelve (12) months old and the traffic volumes have not been significantly changed due to more recent development in the vicinity. The City Engineer or the designee shall approve all requests to use other available traffic counts.

Common rules for conducting traffic counts include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Peak hour turning movement volumes shall be conducted on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, or Thursdays during weeks not containing a holiday. Counts shall be conducted in favorable weather conditions.
• Counts shall be collected when schools and colleges are in session, but not during the first two weeks that the schools and colleges are in session. Counts collected when schools and colleges are not in session shall be approved by the City Engineer, including a methodology for adding historical school traffic volumes into the analysis. • Counts shall be collected during AM (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and PM (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) peak periods, unless otherwise specified (such as midday or weekend peak periods).
• Counts should include the peak hour factor calculation. • A qualified traffic analyst shall observe each study intersection during peak hours of analysis and document their observations such as lane utilization, delay, queue lengths in the field, adjacent intersection queues affecting study intersection capacity, etc.

3.6. TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation should be based on one or more of the following:
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (most current edition)
o Rates should be calculated using the average weight or weighted average formula when applicable.
o Special consideration should be given for ITE rates based on old data or a small sample and may require additional data collection to determine the appropriate trip generation.
• New rates should be generated using community examples for uses not updated or included in the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
131
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 25 • No pass-by trip reductions are allowed unless justified and approved by the City Engineer.
• All assumptions shall have proper citation and justification for their use in the LTA.

Projected daily trips, AM and PM peak hour trips for the approved, pending and proposed project shall be summarized in a table. Trip generation rates, factors and source, as well as the totals for the inbound and outbound trips shall also be provided in a table. Trip generation should be summarized in a table form similar to the one below:

Proposed Trip Generation for Weekday
Land Use
Size
Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate
In/Out
Trips
In/Out
Trips
Total
Rate
In/Out
Trips
In/Out
Trips
Total
Retail 4 ksf 120 480 4
60/40
12/8 19 13.25
50/50
26/26 53
Townhomes 32 Apts 7.5 240 10
35/65
8/16 24 0.75
65/35
16/8 24
Senior 100
Units

3.6 360 12
40/60
17/26 43 0.43
60/40
26/170 43
Total Trips 1080 37/49 86 68/52 120

3.7. TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Trip distribution shall be based on existing travel patterns, locations of complimentary land uses, and/or information derived from the Fresno COG travel model such as a “select zone” analysis.

A figure illustrating the percentage of peak hour traffic going to and from various destinations along the transportation network shall be provided. A figure illustrating peak hour project-only trips at the driveways, study intersections, and roadway segments shall be provided based on the trip distribution. If the trip distribution is different between Existing, Near-Term, and Cumulative conditions, then a figure needs to be provided for each different trip distribution with supporting discussion and justification.

The travel model should be used for a general trip distribution to and from the north, south, east, and west directions; however, the project trips should be manually distributed to the driveways, intersections, and roadway segments. The travel model should not be relied upon to distribute project trips to specific intersection and driveway turn movements.

For General Plan Amendments, the local transportation analysis shall include a trip distribution to affected Caltrans freeway interchanges for both the current General Plan land use and the proposed land use per the GPA. All assumptions shall have proper citation and justification for their use.
132
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 26 3.8. APPROVED AND PENDING PROJECTS
Approved and pending projects located within the vicinity of the project (i.e., developments generating vehicle trips that would impact study intersections and/or roadway segments) or as determined by the City Engineer, that can reasonably be expected to be in place by the project's build out year must be included in the analysis. Related projects shall include all approved, pending, or constructed projects that are not occupied at the time of the existing traffic counts. A list of approved and pending projects shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval along with the scope of work. Engineering staff will work with consultants to develop the list if necessary.

A table summarizing the approved and pending projects with their locations, and trip generation shall be provided. If conditional use permit/parcel map/tract numbers are available, then they should be provided in the table. Pending projects are defined as those projects that have been accepted for processing by the City of Clovis Planning and Development Department.

Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) should be identified and documented with funding source and anticipated completion year. City Engineering staff should be contacted for information on CIP projects near a given project.

3.9. SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
Site access and circulation analysis shall be conducted, and recommendations shall be included in the local transportation analysis to address safe and acceptable traffic operations. A figure illustrating the proposed site plan with proposed primary access points should be provided.

Discussion on the location and distance of the access points from nearby intersections shall also be provided. The proposed site plan shall illustrate access points and peak hour project-only trips at the access points. For projects that are anticipated to generate truck traffic, truck operations shall also be evaluated to ensure adequacy of site design to satisfy truck loading demand on-site and within the vicinity of the project site, and to ensure that traffic operations on roadways and intersection are satisfactory.

The local transportation analysis should calculate anticipated queues and minimum required throat depth (MRTD) at the project access points and summarize these in a table. The analysis should also evaluate the proposed site plan for sight distance and other unsafe traffic conditions and provide recommendations to mitigate them.

The local transportation analysis shall also conceptually address safe pedestrian paths of travel from:
• residential developments to school sites;
• public streets to commercial and residential areas; and • nearby bus stops to project sites.
133
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 27 3.10. QUEUING AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS
Queuing analysis for study intersections shall be conducted and documented in the local transportation analysis based on the LOS calculations. Recommendations for queues under existing conditions or projected to exceed the available storage shall be provided. Recommendations such as, but not limited to, extending existing storage and adding exclusive turn lanes and innovative techniques shall be considered and recommended.

3.11. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS THRESHOLDS
For study signalized intersections, a traffic operations issue is identified if the addition of the traffic generated from the proposed project results in any one of the following:
• Triggers a signalized intersection operating at acceptable LOS to operate at unacceptable levels of service
• Increases the average delay for a study signalized intersection that is already operating at unacceptable LOS
Unsignalized intersections should maintain a Level of Service no worse than LOS D. Unsignalized intersections may include all-way stop, or two-way stop controlled. The delay for unsignalized intersections should be computed as follows:
• All-way stop-controlled – use average delay
• Two-way stop-controlled – use worst approach delay
For unsignalized study intersections, an adverse traffic operations issue is identified if the addition of the traffic generated from the proposed project results in any one of the following:
• Triggers an unsignalized intersection operating at acceptable LOS to operate at unacceptable levels of service (from E or better to F) and meet the signal warrants criteria
• Increases the applicable delay for an unsignalized study intersection that is already operating at unacceptable LOS and meets the signal warrant criteria Improvements to unsignalized intersections may include a change of traffic control, including yield control, traffic circle/roundabout, or a traffic signal. The CA MUTCD states that if one or more of the criteria for signal warrants is met, an engineering study is required to evaluate other factors to determine if an intersection must be signalized. When analyzed, the peak hour and 8-hour traffic signal warrants should be used to determine if a traffic signal is recommended to improve the adverse effects identified at an unsignalized intersection. Additionally, if a project is near a school or a downtown area with substantial pedestrian activity, then the City may require additional warrants to be evaluated such as pedestrian, accident history, etc. The City reserves the right to determine if a warranted signal will be installed.
134
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 28 3.12. ANALYSIS DISCUSSION
The local transportation analysis should discuss conclusions regarding the transportation issues caused by the proposed project on the roadway system. If the traffic generated by this and other projects requires improvements that are not covered by current impact fees, then the project’s fair share percentage shall be calculated using peak-hour volumes and provided in the local transportation analysis.

For all recommendations to increase the number of travel lanes on a street or at an intersection as an improvement, the report must clearly identify the impacts associated with such a change, such as whether or not additional right of way will be required and whether it is feasible to acquire the right of way based on the level of development of the adjacent land and buildings, if any. All improvements should be reviewed in the field to make sure that they can be accommodated. If they cannot be accommodated or are not feasible, those findings need to be included in the local transportation analysis.

The local transportation analysis should discuss other possible adverse impacts on traffic. Examples of such impacts include:
• the limited visibility of access points on curved roadways • the need for pavement widening to provide left-turn and right-turn lanes at access points into the proposed project
• the impact of increased traffic volumes on local residential streets • the need for road realignment to improve sight distance Projects which propose to amend the City’s General Plan Land Use and substantially increase potential traffic generation must provide an analysis of the project at current planned land use versus proposed land use in the build out condition for the project area, including future cumulative conditions. The purpose of such analysis is to provide decision makers with the understanding of the planned circulation network’s ability to accommodate additional traffic generation caused by the proposed General Plan Land Use amendments.

The LTA shall be provided as an electronic PDF copy to the City of Clovis City Engineer, according to the report format presented in Attachment D.

135
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 29 4. LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City of Clovis has established procedures so that the level of environmental review for land use projects should be no greater than the level of environmental review prior to the implementation of SB 743. This section provides guidance on the level of environmental review and/or transportation analysis that may be required for various scenarios.

4.1. GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
In 2022, the City of Clovis prepared a focused update to the 2014 General Plan Circulation Element which includes policy language additions that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms. The City also prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update. The SEIR evaluates potential land uses consistent with the General Plan and their associated VMT impacts.

The SEIR finds that implementation of the General Plan may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds. Mitigation measures include policies to reduce VMT. Because the City cannot demonstrate that the implementation of these policies would achieve VMT reductions to meet the VMT thresholds, the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Following approval of the General Plan Update and SEIR, individual land use development projects that are consistent with the General Plan may have the opportunity to tier their environmental review from the General Plan SEIR. The SEIR has disclosed the VMT impacts of land use development consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, these findings do not need to be disclosed in an EIR for individual projects that are consistent with the General Plan. If necessary, individual projects are required to implement mitigation measures consistent with the policies in the updated Circulation Element.

4.2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SCENARIOS
A land use development project may have different levels of required environmental documentation and transportation analysis depending on consistency with the General Plan and VMT requirements.

Regardless of the requirements for VMT analysis, evaluation of other CEQA transportation criteria (policies, hazards, emergency access) for the CEQA document and a Local Transportation Analysis may still be required.

4.2.1. Project Has Non-Transportation Environmental Impacts If a proposed project will have environmental impacts other than or in addition to transportation impacts that require disclosure and possible significant unavoidable, an EIR is likely to be required regardless of transportation conditions.
136
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 30 A project which requires an EIR for other subjects may still be exempt from a CEQA VMT analysis if it meets the screening criteria described in Section 2.1.1. However, evaluation of other CEQA transportation criteria (policies, hazards, emergency access) and a Local Transportation Analysis may still be required.

Probable Environmental Review
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Supporting TIA (TIA may be Local Transportation Analysis only)

4.2.2. Project Has Transportation Impacts Only
If a proposed project will have potential transportation impacts but no other environmental impacts which require an EIR, the level of environmental review will depend on these TIA guidelines.

4.2.2.1. Project Meets VMT Screening Criteria
If a project qualifies for one of the screening criteria described in Section 2.1.1, it may be exempt from a CEQA VMT analysis. However, evaluation of other CEQA transportation criteria (policies, hazards, emergency access) and a Local Transportation Analysis may still be required.

The screening for low VMT areas must be based on the base year (2019) mapping as shown in Attachment B. Screening cannot be based on mapping of VMT under future cumulative conditions.

Probable Environmental Review
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
Supporting TIA (TIA may be Local Transportation Analysis only)

4.2.2.2. Project Does Not Meet VMT Screening Criteria, Project VMT Analysis Under Threshold If a project does not qualify for one of the screening criteria described in Section 2.1.1, it still may be exempt from a CEQA VMT impact finding. In many cases, the existing land uses represented in the base year VMT screening maps do not correctly represent proposed land uses. A project- specific VMT analysis using the Fresno COG travel model should be used to identify the specific VMT characteristics of the proposed project relative to base year conditions. This analysis would supersede the VMT screening maps.

The 2022 General Plan SEIR included an evaluation of future (2042) cumulative VMT conditions with probable development of the General Plan. Maps of this analysis are included in Attachment 137
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 31 E. The future VMT maps cannot be used for screening from VMT analysis requirements, but can provide a preview of likely outcomes of a project-specific VMT analysis in each area of the City.

If the project-specific VMT analysis shows that the proposed project would be below the applicable VMT thresholds, then a CEQA VMT impact finding would not be required.

Probable Environmental Review
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
Supporting TIA with Project-Specific VMT Analysis and Local Transportation Analysis

4.2.2.3. Project Does Not Meet VMT Screening Criteria, Project VMT Analysis Above Threshold, Project Consistent with General Plan
If a project does not qualify for one of the screening criteria described in Section 2.1.1, a project- specific VMT analysis using the Fresno COG travel model should be used to identify the specific VMT characteristics of the proposed project relative to base year conditions.

If the project-specific VMT analysis shows that the proposed project would be above the applicable VMT thresholds, then a CEQA VMT impact finding would be required. The project would be required to identify mitigation for VMT impacts, including mitigation consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element.

If it cannot be demonstrated that mitigation would reduce VMT of the proposed project below the applicable threshold, then a significant and unavoidable impact will be reported. Without the General Plan SEIR, disclosure of this significant and unavoidable impact would have triggered a requirement for an EIR. With the approval of the General Plan SEIR, the significant and unavoidable VMT impacts associated with General Plan development have already been disclosed. Therefore, a less extensive environmental document may be appropriate, as long as the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.

Probable Environmental Review
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) with VMT Mitigation Supporting TIA with Project-Specific VMT Analysis and Local Transportation Analysis

4.2.2.4. Project Does Not Meet VMT Screening Criteria, VMT Analysis Above Threshold, Not Consistent with General Plan
If a project does not qualify for one of the screening criteria described in Section 2.1.1, and the project is not consistent with the General Plan or represents a General Plan Amendment, then it may not be possible to tier off the General Plan SEIR.
138
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 32 If a project-specific VMT analysis shows that the proposed project would be above the applicable VMT thresholds, then a CEQA VMT impact finding would be required. The project would be required to identify mitigation for VMT impacts.

If it cannot be demonstrated that mitigation would reduce VMT of the proposed project below the applicable threshold, then a significant and unavoidable impact will be reported. Since the project is not consistent with the General Plan, the City may choose to perform a comparative analysis of the proposed project to determine if beneficial (or equivalent) VMT impacts would result, in comparison to pre-project conditions. If substantial evidence supports the conclusion that VMT impacts resulting from the project would be equivalent to or less-than (beneficial effect) the pre-project condition, the City may make a finding that the impacts have been disclosed through the General Plan SEIR. If substantial evidence does not support a determination that equivalent or beneficial effects would result from the proposed project, the VMT impacts would not have been previously disclosed. Therefore, an EIR is likely to be required.

Probable Environmental Review
EIR with VMT Mitigation and Findings of Overriding Considerations Supporting TIA with Project-Specific VMT Analysis and Local Transportation Analysis

139
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 33 Attachment A: High Quality Transit Areas Map
140
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BARSTOW AVE

W SHAW AVE

W ASHLAN AVE
N
FOW
LER
AVE

NEES AVE

SHAW AVE
N
TEM

PERANCE
AVE

W TEAGUE AVE

CLOVIS AVE

BULLARD AVEW BULLARD AVE

W SIERRA AVE

ASHLAN AVE
N
M
INNEW
AW
A
AVE
TEM

PERANCE AVE
ARM

STRONG AVE
N
CLOVIS
AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE
FOW

LER AVE
N
LOCAN
AVE

HARLAN RANCHBLVD

HERNDON AVE
N
W
ILLOW
AVE

NSUNNYSIDE AVE

VILLA AVE

SIERRA AVE

LOCAN AVE
M
INNEW
AW
A AVE

PEACH AVE

W NEES AVE
W
ILLOW
AVE

W BARSTOW AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

W ALLUVIAL AVE

FIFTH ST
N
DE
W
OLF
AVE

GETTYSBURG AVE
DE
W
OLF
AVE

W HERNDON AVE

HIGHLAND AVE

LEONARD AVE
"þ168
24913 - City of Clovis VMT Implementation July 2020
¯
Figure
A1
Existing High Quality Transit Areas
City of Clovis VMT Implementation
H:\24\24727 - Ceres SSARP\gis\High_Quality_Transit - v3.mxd - gcarsky - 8:14 AM 7/14/2020 Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California IV FIPS 0404 Feet Data Source: City of Clovis
FAX Route 9
15 Minute Frequency
High Quality Transit Area
City Boundary
0 10.5 Miles
141
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 34 Attachment B: VMT Screening Maps

142
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

BARSTOW AVE

W ASHLAN AVE
N
FOW
LER
AVE

NEES AVE

SHAW AVE

W TEAGUE AVE

CLOVIS AVE

GETTYSBURG AVE

BULLARD AVEW BULLARD AVE

W SIERRA AVE

ASHLAN AVE
N
M
INNEW
AW
A
AVE
TEM

PERANCE AVE
N
CLOVIS
AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE
FOW

LER AVE
N
LOCAN
AVE

W BARSTOW AVE
N
TEM

PERANCE
AVE

HERNDON AVE

VILLA AVE

SIERRA AVE

LOCAN AVE
M
INNEW
AW
A AVE

PEACH AVE

W NEES AVE
W
ILLOW
AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

W ALLUVIAL AVE

FIFTH ST
DE
W
OLF
AVE

W HERNDON AVE

LEONARD AVE
"þ168
24913 - City of Clovis VMT Implementation
¯
Figure
B1
Existing VMT Per Capita (2019)
City of Clovis VMT Implementation
H:\24\24913 - City of Clovis VMT Impletentation\gis\Clovis_VMTpercap_(2019)_nolabel.mxd - gcarsky - 9:20 AM 2/4/2021 Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California IV FIPS 0404 Feet Data Source: City of Clovis
VMT per Capita
VMT per Capita Regional Average = 16.1
No Data
Less than 13% Below Regional Average
13% Below to Regional Average
Regional Average to 13% Above
More than 13% Above Regional Average
Sphere of Influence
0 10.5 Miles
143
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

BARSTOW AVE

W ASHLAN AVE
N
FOW
LER
AVE

NEES AVE

SHAW AVE

W TEAGUE AVE
CLOVIS
AVE

BULLARD AVE

W BULLARD AVE

W SIERRA AVE

ASHLAN AVE
N
M
INNEW
AW
A
AVE
TEM

PERANCE AVE
N
CLOVIS
AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE
FOW

LER AVE
N
LOCAN
AVE
N
TEM

PERANCE
AVE

HERNDON AVE

SIERRA AVE

LOCAN AVE
M
INNEW
AW
A AVE

VILLA AVE

PEACH AVE

W NEES AVE
W
ILLOW
AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

W ALLUVIAL AVE

FIFTH ST

GETTYSBURG AVE
DE
W
OLF
AVE

W HERNDON AVE

LEONARD AVE
"þ168
24913 - City of Clovis VMT Implementation
¯
Figure
B2
Existing VMT Per Employee (2019)
City of Clovis VMT Implementation
H:\24\24913 - City of Clovis VMT Impletentation\gis\Clovis_VMTperemp(2019)_nolabel.mxd - gcarsky - 9:22 AM 2/4/2021 Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California IV FIPS 0404 Feet Data Source: City of Clovis
VMT per Employee
VMT per Employee Regional Average = 25.6
No Data
Less than 13% Below Regional Average
13% Below to Regional Average
Regional Average to 13% Above
More than 13% Above Regional Average
Sphere of Influence
0 10.5 Miles
144
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 35 Attachment C: VMT-Reducing Transportation Projects

145
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 36 VMT-Reducing Transportation Projects
Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity

Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails

Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes

Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety

Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes

Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit

Conversion of existing general purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel

Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles

Reduction in number of through lanes

Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles

Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority (TSP) features

Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow

Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow

Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles

Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices

Adoption of or increase in tolls

Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase

Initiation of new transit service

Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in number of traffic lanes

Removal or relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces

146
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 37 VMT-Reducing Transportation Projects
Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs)

Addition of traffic wayfinding signage

Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity

Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights- of-way

Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-motorized travel

Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure

Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor

147
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 38 Attachment D: Local Transportation Analysis Report Format

148
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 39 Local Transportation Analysis Report Format

COVER PAGE

1. Project address

2. Project name (if applicable)

3. Prepared for

4. Date (month/day/year)

5. Consultant contact information including a contact name

6. Consultant job number (if applicable)

7. Entitlement Number (i.e. Tract or CUP Number)

8. City Planner Name (if known)

9. Stamp and/or signature of qualified engineer or authorized owner/principal of firm stating the study was prepared and reviewed under their supervision and direction.

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Provide summary of the LTA, project location and size, intersections analyzed, study scenarios, impacts, mitigation and recommendations in a figure and table. Methodology used to analyze the impacts does not need to be included in the executive summary.

Document results of LOS analysis, intersections and roadway segments Provide summary of site access and circulation. Results of LOS analysis should be summarized in a table form as follows for both existing and cumulative scenarios:

Summary of Intersection Level of Service
Intersection
Existing
Delay LOS
Existing plus
Proposed Project
Delay LOS
Existing plus Approved and
Pending plus
Proposed Project
Delay LOS

INTRODUCTION
Provide description of the project, location, size and proposed primary access. A vicinity map showing the site location and the study area relative to other transportation systems along with study intersections and roadway segments should be provided.

Document study intersections, roadway segments and study scenarios providing brief explanation on each study scenarios. Describe the methodology used to analyze the impacts of the study and the thresholds for determining an impact.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Provide a description of existing streets and roadways within the project site (if any) and in the surrounding area. Include information on the roadway classifications (per the 149
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 40 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element), the number of lanes, posted speed limits, divided/undivided and bike lanes.

Existing daily directional and peak-hour through and turning traffic volumes on the roadways surrounding and/or logically associated with the project site, including major highways and freeways. Local streets affected by the project should also be shown. Each report shall include appendices providing count data used in the preparation of the report. The source and date of the traffic volume information shall be indicated. A figure illustrating the peak hour traffic volumes, lane configurations, and traffic control at the study intersections and roadway segments should be provided.

All assumed roadways and intersections or any other transportation circulation improvements must be identified and discussed. The discussion should include the scope and the status of the assumed improvements including the construction schedule and financing plan.

In addition, any transit facilities within 1,300 feet of the project or study intersections/roadways segments, including the service provider(s), routes, frequency and location/amenities of existing bus stops should be provided.

Existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities adjacent to the project site, utilized by the project, connected to by the project, or impacted by the project should be identified and described in detail.

Results of LOS analysis should be summarized in table (in a format illustrated above) and discussed. If any of the study intersections or roadway segments are operating at unacceptable levels, mitigation measures should be identified.

EXISTING PLUS PROPOSED PROJECT CONDITIONS
This scenario is required by CEQA to show the impacts of the proposed project on the existing conditions. It should include a project description, trip generation and distribution, level of service analysis, and appropriate tables, figures, and recommendations/mitigation as described below.

Project Description
A description of the project, including factors which quantify traffic generators, e.g., dwelling units, square feet of office space, persons to be employed, restaurant seats, acres of raw land, etc. Provide site plan including access, project-only trips at the access points, circulation, parking, and loading as applicable.

Trip Generation and Trip Distribution
Provide trip generation and trip distribution. Provide any relevant information, discussion if applicable.

150
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 41 Level of Service Analysis
Provide a figure illustrating peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections and roadway segments for Existing plus Proposed Project Conditions. Results of LOS analysis should be summarized in table and discussed. If any of the study intersections or roadway segments are projected to operate at unacceptable levels, mitigation measures should be identified.

Site Access and Circulation
Provide site access and circulation analysis and discussion as per the “SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION” Section of this document. Provide a figure showing on site and circulation recommendations.

NEAR-TERM ANALYSIS (EXISTING PLUS APPROVED AND PENDING PROJECT PLUS PROPOSED

PROJECT CONDITIONS)
Approved and pending projects located within the vicinity of project, (projects that would impact study intersections and/or roadway segments or as determined by Traffic Engineering Manager), that can reasonably be expected to be in place by the project's construction year along with the trip generation should be summarized in a table. A figure illustrating the Existing plus Approved and Pending Projects Plus Proposed Project peak hour traffic volumes should be provided.

Results of LOS analysis should be summarized in table and discussed. If any of the study intersections or roadway segments are projected to operate at unacceptable levels, mitigation measures should be identified.

CUMULATIVE 20-YEAR AND CUMULATIVE 20-YEAR PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS Provide similar information for both scenar ios as above referenced scenarios. Please discuss in detail how the traffic volume forecasts were developed using the Fresno COG model. This information should be easy to follow and reproducible by a peer consultant.

QUEUING
Discuss and provide recomme ndations to mitigate unacceptable queues at study intersections under appropriate scenarios as applicable.

SIGNAL WARRANTS
Provide signal warrants analysis and discuss results of the analysis under appropriate scenarios as applicable.

CONCLUSION

MITIGATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Provide objective recommendations in a table or figure and discuss the timing and funding of recommendations.

151
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 42 APPENDIX
Traffic Counts
Fresno COG Model Runs and Turning Movement Forecast outputs Signal Warrants
References and Bibliography Level Service Calculation Sheets

152
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Clovis Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines September 15, 2022 43 Attachment E: General Plan 2042 VMT Maps

153
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

BARSTOW AVE

W ASHLAN AVE
N
FOW
LER
AVE

NEES AVE

SHAW AVE

W TEAGUE AVE

GETTYSBURG AVE

BULLARD AVEW BULLARD AVE
CLO
VIS
AVE

W SIERRA AVE

ASHLAN AVE
N
M
INNEW
AW
A
AVE

TEMPERANCE AVE
NCLO
VIS
AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE

FOWLER AVE
N
LOCAN
AVE

HERNDON AVE

VILLA AVE

SIERRA AVE

LOCAN AVE

MINNEWAWA AVEPEACH AVE

W NEES AVE

WILLOW AVE

W BARSTOW AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

W ALLUVIAL AVE

FIFTH ST
N
TEM

PERANCE
AVE
DE
W
OLF
AVE

W HERNDON AVE

LEONARD AVE
"þ168
24913 - City of Clovis VMT Implementation
¯
Figure
E1
VMT Per Capita (2042)
Compared to 2019 Regional Average (16.1)
H:\24\24913 - City of Clovis VMT Impletentation\gis\Clovis_VMTpercap_2042_2019avg.mxd - maronson - 8:46 AM 6/16/2022 Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California IV FIPS 0404 Feet Data Source: City of Clovis
VMT per Capita
VMT per Capita Regional Average = 16.1
No Data
Less than 13% Below Regional Average
13% Below to Regional Average
Regional Average to 13% Above
More than 13% Above Regional Average
Sphere of Influence
0 10.5 Miles
154
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

BARSTOW AVE

W ASHLAN AVE
N
FOW
LER
AVE

NEES AVE

SHAW AVE

W TEAGUE AVE

GETTYSBURG AVE

BULLARD AVEW BULLARD AVE
CLO
VIS
AVE

W SIERRA AVE

ASHLAN AVE
N
M
INNEW
AW
A
AVE

TEMPERANCE AVE
NCLO
VIS
AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE

FOWLER AVE
N
LOCAN
AVE

HERNDON AVE

VILLA AVE

SIERRA AVE

LOCAN AVE

MINNEWAWA AVEPEACH AVE

W NEES AVE

WILLOW AVE

W BARSTOW AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

W ALLUVIAL AVE

FIFTH ST
N
TEM

PERANCE
AVE
DE
W
OLF
AVE

W HERNDON AVE

LEONARD AVE
"þ168
24913 - City of Clovis VMT Implementation
¯
Figure
E2
VMT Per Employee (2042)
Compared to 2019 Regional Average (25.6)
H:\24\24913 - City of Clovis VMT Impletentation\gis\Clovis_VMTperemp_2042_2019avg_20220616.mxd - maronson - 8:53 AM 6/16/2022 Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California IV FIPS 0404 Feet Data Source: City of Clovis
VMT per Employee
VMT per Employment Regional Average = 25.6
No Data
Less than 13% Below Regional Average
13% Below to Regional Average
Regional Average to 13% Above
More than 13% Above Regional Average
Sphere of Influence
0 10.5 Miles
155
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

SUPPLEMENTAL

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE

2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN

CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
(State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069)

JUNE 29, 2022

Prepared for:

City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2346

Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
(916) 812-7927
D e N o v o P l a n n i n g G r o u p
A L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g , D e s i g n , a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l F i r m Attachment 4
156
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

157
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

SUPPLEMENTAL

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE

2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN

CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
(State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069)

JUNE 29, 2022

Prepared for:

City of Clovis
Contact: Ricky Caperton, AICP, Deputy City Planner
Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, California 93612
559.324.2346

Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
(916) 812-7927

158
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

159
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update TOC-1

DRAFT EIR
Chapter Page Number
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... ES-1

1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1.0-1

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1.0-1

1.2 Purpose of the EIR .................................................................................................. 1.0-1

1.3 Type of EIR .............................................................................................................. 1.0-2

1.4 Known Responsible and Trustee Agencies ............................................................. 1.0-2

1.5 Environmental Review Process ............................................................................... 1.0-3

1.6 Organization and Scope .......................................................................................... 1.0-4

1.7 Comments Received on the Notice of Preparation ................................................ 1.0-6

2.0 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 2.0-1

2.1 Background and Overview ...................................................................................... 2.0-1

2.2 Project Objectives ................................................................................................... 2.0-5

2.3 Description of Proposed Project ............................................................................. 2.0-5

2.4 Uses of the EIR and Required Agency Approvals .................................................. 2.0-11

3.1 Transportation and Circulation ............................................................................................ 3.1-1

3.14.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................... 3.1-1

3.14.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................. 3.1-2

3.14.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................... 3.1-16

4.0 Other CEQA-Required Topics ............................................................................................... 4.0-1

4.1 Cumulative Setting and Impact Analysis ................................................................. 4.0-1

4.2 Significant Irreversible and Adverse Effects ........................................................... 4.0-5

4.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ...................................................................... 4.0-5 160
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

5.0 Alternatives .......................................................................................................................... 5.0-1

5.1 CEQA Requirements ................................................................................................ 5.0-1

5.2 Alternatives Considered in this EIR ......................................................................... 5.0-3

5.3 Environmental Analysis ........................................................................................... 5.0-3

6.0 Report Preparers .................................................................................................................. 6.0-1

7.0 References ........................................................................................................................... 7.0-1 Table Page Number
Table ES-1: Comparison of Alternatives to the Proposed Project ....................................... ES-2 Table ES-2: Project Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures ....................................... ES-4 Table 2.0-1: Sample Small Projects (less than 500 daily trips) ............................................ 2.0-2 Table 3.1-1: Demographics and VMT, 2019 Baseline Conditions ........................................ 3.1-2 Table 3.1-2: Clovis General Plan Land Use ......................................................................... 3.1-18 Table 3.1-3: VMT Thresholds for Land Development Projects .......................................... 3.1-20 Table 3.1-4: VMT Results Summary ................................................................................... 3.1-22 Table 4.0-1: Clovis General Plan Land Use ........................................................................... 4.0-2 Table 5.0-1: Comparison of Alternatives to the Proposed Project ...................................... 5.0-5 Figures
Note: Figures are located at the end of the chapters.

Figure 2.0-1 Regional Location Map
Figure 2.0-2 Clovis Planning Area
Figure 2.0-3 Land Use Diagram
Figure 2.0-4 Urban Centers
Figure 2.0-5 Focus Areas and Specific Plans
Figure 3.1-1 VMT Per Capita (2042) Compared to 2019 Regional Average (16.1) Figure 3.1-2 VMT Per Employee (2042) Compared to 2019 Regional Average (25.6)

Appendices
Appendix A – Notice of Preparation
Appendix B – NOP comments
161
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update ES-1

PURPOSE
The City of Clovis, as lead agency, determined that the proposed Project is a "project" within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), and requires the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This Dr aft Supplemental EIR has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with implementation of the project. This EIR is designed to inform decision -makers in the City, other responsible and trustee agencies, and the general public of the po tential environmental consequences of approval and implementation of the proposed Project . A detailed description of the proposed project, including the project objectives, and how the Supplemental EIR will be used, is provided in Chapter 2.0 (Project Description).

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
This Draft Supplemental EIR addresses environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project that are known to the City, raised during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) scoping process, or were ra ised during preparation of the Draft EIR. This Draft Supplemental EIR is focused on addressing the potentially significant impacts associated with transportation and cumulative impacts. All other environmental topics have been determined to have no change or a less -than- significant impact.

During the NOP process, eight (8) comment letters were received from interested agencies and organizations. The comments are provided in Appendix A. The following are topics of public concern or potential controversy that have become known to the City staff based on public input, known regional issues, and staff observations:
• Adoption of Senate Bill 743 ( SB 743) created a need for the City to address Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) related impacts for projects that buildout under the General Plan.

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The CEQA Guidelines require an EIR to describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the project or to the location of the project which would reduce or avoid significant impacts, and which c ould feasibly accomplish the basic objectives of the proposed project. The alternatives analyzed in this EIR include the following:

NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, and the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidance for analyzing VMT. 162
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ES-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

POLICY CHANGE ONLY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its existing General Plan. This would include policy changes to the Circulation Element intended to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743. Under this alternative, the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the OPR Guidance for analyzing VMT.

TIA GUIDE LINES ONLY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, but the City would adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines defining the methodology for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
A comparative an alysis of the proposed General Plan and each of the Project alternatives is provided in Table ES-1 below. The proposed Project is considered the environmentally superior alternative because it provides the greatest potential to be consistent with State law (SB 743), and to establish a consistent approach to VMT analysis, and VMT reduction when compared to the other alternatives. The proposed Project established the City’s policy direction related to these topics, while the other alternatives only partial ad dress VMT reduction, or do not address the topic.

TABLE ES-1: COMPARISON SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC PROPOSED PROJECT No Project
Alternative
Policy Change Only
Alternative
TIA Guidelines Only
Alternative

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION (TC)
TC Impact 3.1-1 LS Slightly greater
impact
Slightly greater
impact
Slightly greater
impact
TC Impact 3.1-2 SU Greater Impact Slightly Greater
Impact
Slightly Greater
Impact
TC Impact 3.1-3 LS Equal Impact Equal Impact Equal Impact Comparison to Proposed
Project Superior Inferior (4th) Inferior (2nd) Inferior (3rd) 163
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update ES-3

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, this Supplemental EIR focuses on the proposed Project’s potentially significant effects on the environment. The CEQA Guidelines defines a significant effect as a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in the area affected by the proposed project. A less -than-significant effect is one in which there is no long or short -term significant adverse change in environmental conditions. Some impacts are reduced to a less -than- significant level with the implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with existing regulations. "Beneficial" effect is not defined in the CEQA Guidelines, but for purposes of this EIR a beneficial effect is one in which an environmental condition is enhanced or improved.

The potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project, the impact level of significance prior to mitigation, the proposed mi tigation measures to mitigate an impact, and the impact level of significance after mitigation are summarized in Table ES-2. 164
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ES EXECUTIV E SUMMARY

CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant SU – significant and unavoidable NI – No Impact ES-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

TABLE ES-2: PROJECT IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact 3.1-1: General Plan implementation may
conflict with a program, plan, policy or
ordinance addressing the circulation system,
including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities

NI N/A --
Impact 3.1-2: General Plan implementation may
result in VMT metrics that are greater than the
applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline
conditions)
PS
Mitigation Measure TRANS -1: Implement a Commute Trip Reduction Program: The City shall implement a commute trip program applicable to all or selected employers in the City of Clovis. The criteria for inclusion in the commute trip reduction program are to be determined by the City, and could be based on building size, square footage of retail uses above the amount that qualifies to be screened out as local -serving, number of potential employees and/or other criteria that are appropriate for participation in the program. The program would include the following components that may be applicable for existing land uses and new land use development projects:
• trip reduction targets
• measures to discourage single occupancy vehicles while encouraging alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, ridesharing, vanpooling, subsidized transit passes and other benefits,
• include a guaranteed ride home for eligible employers, • establish applicable fees and funding mechanisms,
• define monitoring measures and frequency, and strategies for non-compliance.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -2: Support the Implem entation of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) for Focused Areas: The City shall identify focused areas to implement TMAs via public -private partnerships to support the implementation, management and monitoring of transportation demand management (TDM) programs.

Transportation Management Associa tions are non -profit, member -controlled organizations that provide transportation services in a particular area, such as a SU
165
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES

CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant SU – significant and unavoidable NI – No Impact Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update ES-5

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
commercial district, mall, medical center or industrial park. They gener ally consist of area businesses with local government support . TMAs provide an institutional framework for TDM programs and services. They are usually more cost effective than programs managed by individual businesses. TMAs allow small employers to provide Commute Trip Reduction services comparable to those offered by large companies. The main goal for TMAs in Clovis would be to maximize the reduction of VMT. Implementation of TMAs may consist of the following:
• Identify focused areas and Specific Plans that would have the density and mix of land uses c ompatible with multimodal travel and adoption of TDM, as well as the potential to enter development and funding agreements with the City for TMA support.
• Provide seed funding and work with applicants to develop service agreements for the development of TMAs.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -3: Provide Bicycle Facilities: The City shall require land uses that generate more than 500 daily trips (which is the threshold that screens small projects from a detailed VMT analys is) to provide bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers. This meas ure is designed to promote commuting by bicycle and support transit first/last mile access. Bicycle facilities shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with each project and funded by the applicant.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-4: Improve Street Connectivity: The City shall require new area plans and new housing projects to provide a well -connected street network, particularly for non -motorized connections. Increased i ntersection density, alleyways, and mid -block pedestrian crossings may be a proxy f or street connectivity and accessibility to connect a variety of land uses. Characteristics of street network connectivity include short block lengths, numerous three and fo ur-way intersections, and minimal dead -ends (cul-de-sacs).

Street connectivity helps to facilitate shorter vehicle trips and greater numbers of walk and bike trips and thus a reduction in VMT.
166
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ES EXECUTIV E SUMMARY

CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant SU – significant and unavoidable NI – No Impact ES-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

Impact 3.1-3: General Plan implementation may
increase haz ards due to a design feature,
incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency
access

LS N/A --

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS
Impact 4.1: Under Cumulative conditions,
General Plan implementation may conflict with a
program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing
the circulation system, including transit, bicycle,
and pedestrian facilities
LS and LCC N/A --
Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative conditions,
General Plan implementation may result in VMT
metrics that are greater than the applicable
thresholds (13 percent below Baseline
conditions)
PS Mitigated to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions.

No additional feasible mitigation is available. SU and CC Impact 4.3: Under Cumulative conditions,
General Plan implementation may increa se
hazards due to a design feature, incompatible
uses, or inadequate emergency access
LS and LCC N/A --
Significant Irreversible effects LS and LCC N/A --

167
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INTRODUCTION 1.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 1.0-1

1.1 INTRODUCTION
In response to Senate Bill 743 ( SB 743 ), the City of Clovis (City) initiated efforts to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was both consistent with the State’s mandates, and City policy. This effort led to the development of the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20-93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the city for the purpose of determining impacts under the California Environmental Qualit y Act (CEQA).

As the City developed the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines in response to the requirements of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s 2014 General Plan Circulation Element needed to be updated to be in alignment with the State’s mandates, and the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. City staff then embarked on an update to the Circulation Element, which focuses on policy language additions that are aimed at reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled ( VMT) by way of a variety of planning mechanisms.

The City ultimately prepared a focused update to its existing 2014 General Plan. The focused update concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the 2014 General Plan. The proposed Project is the focused update to the Circulation Element and adoption of the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, which are supportive of the Circulation Element.

1.2 PURPOSE OF THE EIR
The City of Clovis, as lead agency, determined t hat the proposed Project is a "project" within the meaning of CEQA. CEQA requires the preparation of an EIR prior to approving any project that may have a significant impact on the environment. For the purposes of CEQA, the term "project" refers to the who le of an action, which has the potential for resulting in a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378[a]).

This Draft Supplemental EIR has been prepared according to CEQA requirements to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. This Draft Supplemental EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, California Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; the Guidelines for the California En vironmental Quality Act (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as adopted by the City of Clovis.

An EIR must disclose the expected direct and indirect environmental impacts as sociated with a project, including impacts that cannot be avoided, growth-inducing effects, impacts found not to be significant, and significant cumulative impacts, as well as identify mitigation measures and alternatives to the proposed project that could reduce or avoid its adverse environmental impacts. 168
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

CEQA requires government agencies to consider and, where feasible, minimize significant environmental impacts of proposed development.

1.3 TYPE OF EIR
The State CEQA Guidelines identify several types of EIRs, each applicable to different project circumstances. This EIR has been prepared as a Supplemental EIR (Supplemental EIR) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. Section 15162 states that a SEIR must be prepared for a project if there is a new signi ficant environmental effect or new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified [CEQA Guidelines Sec 15162(c)]. Furthermore, the CEQA Guidelines provide that a SEIR may be prepared if the project has only minor revisions [CEQA Guidelines Sec 15162(c)].

The legal requirements to address vehicle miles traveled under SB 743 are new, and has resulted in the City of Clovis needing to update their Circulation Element and to establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. The additional analysis required by the EIR is considered “new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified” under [CEQA Guid elines Sec 15162(c)], thus requiring a S upplemental EIR. The addition of new policies and/or refinement of existing policies within the Circulation Element since the General Plan EIR was certified is new information that must be addressed in the Supplemental EIR.

The supplemental-level analysis focuses on the environmental effects from transportation only. An Initial Study was prepared and it was determined that all other environmental topics would have no change, or a less-than-significant impact as a result of the proposed Project. This Supplemental EIR will be used to evaluate subsequent projects and activities under the General Plan as they relate to the environmental topic of transportation . This Supplemental EIR is intended to provide the supplemental information and environmental analysis necessary to assist public agency decision - makers in considering approval of new projects as they relate to the requirements of SB 743.

1.4 KNOWN RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES
The term “Responsible Agency” includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency that have discretionary approval power over the project or an aspect of the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15381). For the purpose of CEQA, a “Trustee” agency has jurisdiction by law over natural resources that are held in trust for the people of the State of California (CEQA Guidelines Section 15386). While no Responsible Agencies or Trustee Agencies are responsible for approvals associated with adoption of the proposed Project, implementation of future projects within Clovis may require permits and approvals from such agencies, which may include the following:
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) coordination regarding regional transportation planning efforts.
• Fresno Council of Governments ( Fresno COG ) coordination regarding regional transportation planning efforts.
169
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INTRODUCTION 1.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 1.0-3

1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The review and certification process for the Supplemental EIR has involved, or will involve, the following general procedural steps:

NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND INITIAL STUDY
The City of Clovis circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed project on April 4, 2022 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse, a nd the public . A scoping meeting was held on April 27, 2022 at the City of Clovis City Hall. No public or agency comments on the NOP related to the EIR analysis were presented or submitted during the scoping meeting.

However, during the 30-day public review period for the NOP, which ended on May 4, 2022, eight (8) written comment letter s were received on the NOP. A summary of the NOP comment s are provided later in this chapter. The NOP and all comments received on the NOP are presented in Appendix A.

DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIR
This document constitutes the Draft Supplemental EIR. The Draft Supplemental EIR contains a description of the project, descri ption of the environmental setting, identification of the project’s direct and indirect impacts on the environment and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant ir reversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. This Draft Supplemental EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and s ignificant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in this Supplemental EIR. Upon completion of the Draft Supplemental EIR, the City of Clovis will file the Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Clearinghouse of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to begin the public review period.

PUBLIC NOTICE /P UBLIC REVIEW
Concurrent with the NOC, the City of Clovis will provide a public notice of availability for the Draft Supplemental EIR, and invite comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. Consistent with CEQA requirements, the review period for this Draft Supplemental EIR is forty -five (45) days. Public comment on the Draft Supplemental EIR will be accepted in written form. All comments or questions regarding the Draft Supplemental EIR should be addressed to:

Dave Merchen | City Planner
City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2346
[email protected]

170
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS /F INAL SUPPLEMENTAL EIR
Following the public review period, a Final Supplemental EIR will be prepared. The Final Supplemental EIR will respond to both oral and written comments received during the public review period.

CERTIFICATION OF THE SEIR /P ROJECT CONSIDERATION
The City of Clovis City Council will review and consider the Final Supplemental EIR. If the City finds that the Final Supplemental EIR is "adequate and complete," the City Council may certify the Final Supplemental EIR in accordance with CEQA. As set forth by CEQA Guidelines Section 15151, the standards of adequacy require an EIR to provide a sufficient degree of analysis to allow decisions to be made regarding the proposed project that intelligently take account of environmental consequences.

Upon review and consideration of the Final EIR, the City Council may take action to approve, revise, or deny the project. It the EIR determines that the project would result in significant adverse impacts to the environment that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, the City Council would be required to adopt a statement of overriding considerations as well as written findings in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093. If additional mitigation measures are required (beyond the General Plan policies and actions that reduce potentially significant impacts, as identified throughout this EIR), a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) would also be adopted in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into or imposed upon the project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. The MMRP would be designed to ensure that these measures are carried out during project implementation, in a manner that is consistent with the EIR.

1.6 ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE
Sections 15122 through 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines identify the content requirements for Draft and Final EIRs. An EIR must include a description of the environmental setting, an environmental impact analysis, mitigation measures for any significant impacts, alternatives, significant irreversible environmental changes, growth -inducing impacts, and cumulative i mpacts.

The EIR prepared reviews environmental and planning documentation developed for the project, environmental and planning documentation prepared for recent projects located within the city of Clovis, and responses to the Notice of Preparation (NOP).

This Draft EIR is organized in the following manner:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Executive Summary summarizes the characteristics of the proposed project, known areas of controversy and issues to be resolved, and provides a concise summary matrix of the project ’s environmental impacts and possible mitigation measures. This chapter identifies alternatives that reduce or avoid at least one significant environmental effect of the proposed project. 171
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INTRODUCTION 1.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 1.0-5

CHAPTER 1.0 - INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1.0 briefly describes the propo sed project, the purpose of the environmental evaluation, identifies the lead, trustee, and responsible agencies, summarizes the process associated with preparation and certification of an EIR, identifies the scope and organization of the Draft EIR, and summarizes comments received on the NOP.

CHAPTER 2.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Chapter 2.0 provides a detailed description of the proposed project, including the location, intended objectives, background information, the physical and technical characteristics, including the decisions subject to CEQA, subsequent projects and activities, and a list of related agency action requirements.

CHAPTER 3.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING , IMPACTS AND

MITIGATION MEASURES
Chapter 3.0 contains an analysis of environmental topic areas as identified below. Each subchapter addressing a topical area is organized as follows:

Environmental Setting. A description of the existing environment as it pertains to the topical area.

Regulatory Setting. A description of the regulatory environment that may be applicable to the project.

Impacts and Mitigation Measures. Identification of the thresholds of significance by which impacts are determined, a description of project -related impacts associated with the environmental topic, identification of ap propriate mitigation measures, and a conclusion as to the significance of each impact.

The following environmental topics are addressed in this section:
• Transportation and Circulation
CHAPTER 4.0 - OTHER CEQA -REQUIRED TOPICS
Chapter 4.0 evaluates and desc ribes the following CEQA required topics: impacts considered less - than-significant, significant and irreversible impacts, growth -inducing effects, cumulative impacts, and significant and unavoidable environmental effects.

CHAPTER 5.0 - ALTERNATIVES
Chapter 5.0 provides a comparative analysis between the merits of the proposed project and the selected alternatives. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, which could feasibly atta in the basic objectives of the project and avoid and/or lessen any significant environmental effects of the project.

172
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

CHAPTER 6.0 - REPORT PREPARERS
Chapter 6.0 lists all authors and agencies that assisted in the preparation of the Draft EIR, by name, title, and company or agency affiliation.

APPENDICES
This section includes all notices and other procedural documents pertinent to the Draft EIR, as well as technical material prepared to support the analysis.

1.7 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City received eight comment letters on the NOP. Copies of this letter is provided in Appendix A of this Draft EIR and the comments are summari zed in the Executive Summary chapter. The City received the following comment letters.
• Native American Heritage Commission, Cameron Vela (April 15, 2022) • California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Gavin McCreary (April 18, 2022) • Clovis Fire Department, Rick Fultz (May 3, 2022)
• County of Fresno, Kevin Tsuda (May 4, 2022)
• Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Denise Wade (May 4, 2022) • County of Fresno, Marissa Parker (May 12, 2022)
• California Department of Transportation, David Padilla (May 4, 2022) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Valerie Cook (June 17, 2022)

173
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-1

2.1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CHANGES
Senate Bill (SB) 743, passed in 2013, resulted in several statewide California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) changes. It required the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to establish new metrics for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the metrics beyond TPAs. TPA means “an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a transportation improvement program adopted to Section 450.216 or 450.322 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations.”
OPR selected Vehicle Miles Traveled ( VMT) as the required transportation impact metric and applied their discretion to require its use statewide for determining potential CEQA impacts related to traffic. This legislation also established that aesthetic and parking effects of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a TPA are not significant impacts on the environment. The revised CEQA Guidelines that implement this legislation became effective on December 28, 2018, and s tate that vehicle Level of Service ( LOS) and similar measures related to delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts for land use projects . As of July 1, 2020, this requirement applied statewide.

The OPR “Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” (December 2018) includes specifications for VMT methodology and recommendations for significance thresholds, screening of project that may be presumed to have less than significant imp acts, and mitigation.

OPR’s screening criteria include s the following categories : small projects, projects near transit stations, affordable residential development, redevelopment projects, and local serving retail. For each category, OPR provides recommended screening analysis methods and metrics to consider. It is noted that the OPR screening criteria is a recommendation by OPR, and is generally used as guidance from OPR in the absence of specific screening criteria established by a local jurisdiction.

The proposed Project, includes the City of Clovis developing their own specific screening criteria, which has similarities to the OPR recommendations, but is specifically tailored to Clovis.

CITY GUIDELINES AND POLICY CHANGES
Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines
In response to SB 743, the City of Clovis initiated effort s to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was both consistent with the State’s mandates, and City policy. This effort led to the development of the Inte rim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20-93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the city for the purpose of 174
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

determining impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are intended to:
• promote conformance with applicable City and State regulations; • provide evaluation consistent with CEQA;
• ensure consistency in preparation of studies by applicants and consultants; and • provide predictability in content for City staff and the public in reviewing studies.

The guidelines are intended to be comprehensive, however, not all aspects of every transportation analysis can be addressed within this framework and the City staff reserves the right to use its judgement to request exemptions and/or to modify requirements for specific projects at the time of the review application.

Project Screening
The Clovis TIA Guidelines provide the following five screening criteria to determine if a project will require a detailed VMT analysis:

1. Small projects

2. Provision of affordable housing

3. Local-serving retail

4. Project located in a High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)

5. Project located in low VMT area

SMALL PROJECTS
Projects that generate or attract fewer than 500 vehicle trips per day are presumed to cause a less- than-significant VMT impact. Projects that typically generate 500 vehicle daily trips are shown in Table 2.0-1.

TABLE 2.0-1: SAMPLE SMALL PROJECTS (LESS THAN 500 DAILY TRIPS)

LAND USE TYPE NUMBER OF UNITS/ SQUARE FEET
Single Family Residential 53 Dwelling Units
Townhome/Attached Residential 68 Dwelling Units
Retail 13,250 SF
Light Industrial 100,800 SF
NOTE: CALCULATED TRIP RATES FROM THE ITE TRIP GENERATION MANUAL, 10TH EDITION.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing is designated as housing for sale or for rent below market rate. R esidential projects in high quality transit areas with a high proportion of affordable housing are presumed to have a less -than-significant transportation impact . Projects can only be screened out if they are located in an area supported by a quality walking and biking network with nearby retail and employment opportunities. If a project contain s less than 100 percent affordable housing, the portion that is affordable should be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis. 175
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-3

LOCAL-SERVING RETAIL AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
Projects that are local-serving retail with 100,000 square feet gross floor area or less are presumed to have a less -than-significant impact. This applies to the entirety of a retail project; for a mixed - use project, this screening criteria should be applied to the retail/commercial component separately to determine if that portion of the project screens out of a detailed VMT analysis.

The determination of local-serving retail is based on location, the characteristics of the project and the vicinity of the site, as well as the envisioned good s and services the retail development would provide. Generally, local -serving retail primarily provides goods and services that most people need on a regular basis and be located close to where people live. Groceries, medicines, fast food and casual restaurants, fitness and beauty services are typical goo ds and services provided by local-serving retail centers.

The City may require that a project applicant provide a market analysis to demonstrate that the project meets the characteristics of a local-serving retail development based on the goods and services provided relative to the geographic location, the customer base , and other nearby retail uses.

Public services (e.g., police, fire stations, public utilities, neighborhood parks 1) do not generally generate substantial amounts of trips and VMT. Instead, t hese land uses are often built to support other nearby land uses (e.g., office and residential). Therefore, these land uses can be presumed to have less -than-significant impacts on VMT. However, this presumption would not apply if the project is sited in a location that requires employees or visitors to travel substantial distances and may require a detailed VMT analysis.

HIGH-QUALITY TRANSIT AREA (HQTA)
Projects that are located in a high-quality transit area would not require a detailed VMT analysis.

However, this presumption does not apply if the project:
• has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• includes substantially more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City (per Section 9.32.040 of the Municipal Code) such that it discourages use of alternative modes (transit, biking, walking) by promoting auto ownership and making driving very convenient; • is inconsistent with the applicable Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as determined by the City; or • replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high- income residential units.

1 For the purpose of cond ucting VMT analyses, neighborhood parks are defined as typically including playground equipment, playfields, and picnic facilities; ranging in size of up to 30 acres; and serving as social and recreational focal points for neighborhoods.
176
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

A map of t he existing High-Quality Transit Areas in the city is provided in Attachment A of the TIA Guidelines.

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ZONES (TAZ)
A TAZ is the unit of geography most commonly used in conventional transportation planning models. The size of a zone varies, but an area of around 3,000 people is not uncommon . The spatial extent of zones typically varies in models, ranging from very large areas in suburbs to as small as city blocks or buildings in central business districts. Zones are constructed by census block information. Typically, these blocks are used in transportation models by providing socio-economic data. Most often the critical information is the number of automobiles per household, household income, and employment within these zones. This information helps to further the understanding of trips that are produced and attracted within the zone.

PROJECT LOCATED IN LOW VMT AREAS
Residential and employment projects that are proposed in areas that generate VMT below adopted City thresholds are presumed to have a less -than-significant VMT impact and thus can be screened out. The City provides screening maps based on TAZs and results from the Fresno Council of Governments ( COG) travel model. The following types of projects may be screened out of detailed VMT analysis using these criteria:
• Residential projects proposed in TAZs with total daily resident-based VMT per capita that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County • Office or the employment portions of other non-residential uses with total daily employee-based VMT per employee that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County
The TAZs that fall into these categories are shown in green in the maps provided in Attachment B of the City’s TIA Guidelines.

CONSISTENCY WITH RTP/SCS
If a proposed project is incons istent with the adopted Fresno COG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/ SCS), the City will evaluate whether that inconsistency may result in a significant impact on transportation. Therefore, projects that are inconsistent with the RTP/SCS would not qualify for screening out of a detailed VMT analysis.

Circulation Element Update
The Clovis City Council adopted the Clovis General Plan on August 25, 2014. Included in the General Plan is the Circulation Element, which determines the transportation system necessary to accommodate the planned land use and development. The Circulation Element identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major transportation facilities, including major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities.

The goals and policies in this element are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and are 177
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-5

intended to provide a balance between the City’s future growth and land use development , roadway size, traffic service levels, and community character.

As the City of Clovis developed the Interim TIA Guidelines in response to the requirements of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s Circulation Element needed to be updated to be in alignment with the State’s mandates, and the Interim TIA Guidelines. City staff then embarked on an update to the Circulation Element, which focuses on policy language additions that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms.

2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives were established for the proposed Project:
• Update City Policy in the Circulation Element to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743.
• Establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to meet the requirements of State law.
• Updates to City Policy and Guidelines should not obstruct and prevent the City from growing in accordance with the City’s existing plans for growth.

2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

FOCUSED UPDATE
The City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing General Plan. The proposed Project concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan. The proposed Project also includes adoption of the T ransportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, which are supportive of the Circulation Element.

The focused General Plan Update does not affect land uses or development patterns, and does not result in any physical development. The key components of the focused General Plan Update include revisions to the goals and policies in the Circulation Element. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form.

GOALS AND POLICIES
Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis adopted a comprehensive General Pla n Update on August 28, 2014. Since then, statewide transportation planning requirements have driven the need to amend the Circulation Element portion of the adopted General Plan. As such, the City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing Gen eral Plan that concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form for ease of identifying the proposed text changes. 178
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
OVERARCHING GOAL: A comprehensive and well -maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods , as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (V MT) through well -planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.

Goal 1: A context-sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs.

Policy 1.1 Multimodal network. The city shall plan, design, operate, and maintain the transportation network to promote safe and convenient travel for all users :
pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, freight, and motorists.

Policy 1.2 Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance t he comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Policy 1.3 Age and mobility . The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Policy 1.4 Jobs and housing. Encourage infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing, and vice versa, to reduce citywide vehicle miles travelled and effectively utilize the existing transportation infrastructure , as well as promote carpooling whenever possible.

Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity . The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood-serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).

Policy 1.6 Internal circulation. New development shall utilize a grid or modified -grid street pattern. Areas designated for residential and mixed -use village developments should feature short block lengths of 200 to 600 feet.

Policy 1.7 Narrow streets. The City may per mit curb -to-curb dimensions that are narrower than current standards on local streets to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and enhance safety.

Policy 1.8 Network completion. New development shall complete the extension of stub streets planned to connect to adjacent streets, where appropriate.

Goal 2: A roadway network that is well planned, funded, and maintained.

Policy 2.1 Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:

1. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours

2. Allow exceptions on a case -by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
• Preserving agriculture or open space land
179
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-7

• Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood • Preserving or creating a pedestrian -friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts
• Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders

1. where right -of-way constraints would make
capacity expansion infeasible
Policy 2.2 Multimodal LOS. Monitor the evolution of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standards. The city may adopt MMLOS standards when appropriate.

Policy 2.3 Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in acc ordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.

Policy 2.4 Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right-of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation.

The City shall request the Count y of Fresno to apply the same requirements in the Clovis planning area.

Policy 2.5 Regional and state roadway funding. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to fund roadway improvements adjacent to and within the City’s Planning Area.

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Development projects shall comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program. Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in -lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders . Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Goal 3: A multimodal transportation network that is safe and comfortable in the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1 Traffic calming. Employ traffic -calming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.

Policy 3.2 Neighborhood compatibility. Periodically review and update design standards to ensure that new and redesig ned streets are compatible with the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3 Old Town and mixed use village centers. Transportation decisions on local streets in Old Town and mixed -use village centers shall prioritize pedestrians, then bicyclists, then mass transit, then motorists.
180
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-8 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Policy 3.4 Road diets. Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.

Policy 3.5 Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or interse ction expansions after considering multimodal alternative improvements to non -automotive facilities.

Policy 3.6 Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.

Policy 3.7 Conflict points. Minimize the number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.

Policy 3.8 Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 fee t of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.

Policy 3.9 Park-once. Encourage “park -once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well -marked access to sidewalks and businesses.

Policy 3.10 Pedestrian access and circulation. Entrances at signalized intersections should provide sidewalks on both sides of the entrance that connect to an internal pedestrian pathway to businesses and throughout nonresidential parking lots larger than 50 spaces.

Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and right -of-ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non-motorized transportation.

Policy 3.12 Residential orientation. Where feasible, residential development should face local and collector streets to increase visibility and safety of travelers along the streets, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access.

Goal 4: A well-planned and maintained pedestrian circulation network that promotes increased use of the City’s bicycle, and transit, and pedestrian system facilities in order to reduce that serves as a functional alternative to commuting by single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible car.

Policy 4.1 Bike and transit backbone. The bicycle and transit system should connect Shaw Avenue, Old Town, the Medical Center/R&T Park, and the three Urban Centers.

Policy 4.2 Priority for new bicycle facilities. Prioritize investments in the backbone system over other bicycle improvements.
181
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-9

Policy 4.3 Freeway crossings. Require separate bicycle and pedestrian crossings for new freeway extensions and encourage separate crossings where Class I facilities are planned to cross existing freeways.

Policy 4.4 Bicycles and transit. Coordinate with transit agencies to i ntegrate bicycle access and storage into transit vehicles, bus stops, and activity centers.

Policy 4.5 Transit stops. Improve and maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit, and rider-friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy 4.6 Transit p riority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.

Policy 4.7 Bus rapid tra nsit. Plan for bus rapid transit and t ransit-only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase.

Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents focusing on connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods, parks, trails, and goods and services.

Policy 5.1 Complete street amenities. Upgrade existing streets and design new streets to include complete street amenities, prioritizing improvements to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety , consistent with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan and other master plans.

Policy 5.2 Development-funded facilities. Require development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan Bicycle Transportation Plan when facilities are in or adjacent to the development.

Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.

Policy 5.4 Homeowner associations. The city may require homeowner associations to maintain pathway s and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the homeowner association area.

Policy 5.5 Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity centers and to provide general pedestrian connectivity throughout the city.

Goal 6: Safe and efficient goods movement with minimal impacts on local roads and neighborhoods.

Policy 6.1 Truck routes . Plan and designate truck routes that minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Policy 6.2 Land use. Place industrial and warehousing businesses near freeways and truck routes to minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas. 182
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-10 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Goal 7: A regional transportation system that connects Clovis to the San Joaquin Valley region.

Policy 7.1 Clovis Avenue extension . Invest in the extension of Clovis Avenue north to Copper Avenue as funding is available.

Policy 7.2 Right-of-way for future extensions. Coordinate with Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to preserve future right -of-way for extending Clovis Avenue north of Copper Avenue to Auberry Road and future State Route 65.

Policy 7.3 San Joaquin River crossing. Collaborate with the Fresno Council of Governments and appropriate agencies to secure a San Joaquin Riv er crossing between State Route 41 and North Fork Road.

Goal 8: Improve and enhance the circulation network in a manner that reduces VMT through improved connectivity by focusing on modes of transportation that promotes the reduction in the use of single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management. Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that promote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, employees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, continue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people between residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes. Seek input from and/or partner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to improve the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe and efficient travel lanes.

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial . Continue to explore opportunities for increased non -vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education. Explore the feasibility of a community outreach and education pr ogram that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non-vehicular modes of transportation for commuting and recreation.

Policy 8.6 Employer commute programs. Work with businesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single -occupancy vehicles, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on-site shower facilities, and perks for employees who commute. 183
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 2.0-11

2.6 USES OF THE EIR AND REQUIRED AGENCY APPROVALS
This Supplemental EIR may be u sed for the following direct and indirect approvals and permits associated with adoption and implementation of the proposed Project.

CITY OF CLOVIS
The City of Clovis is the lead agency for the proposed Project. The proposed focused General Plan Update will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the City Council for comment, review, and consideration for adoption. The City Council has the sole discretionary authority to approve and adopt the proposed focused General Plan Update. In order to approve the proposed Project, the City Council would consider the following actions:
• Certification of the General Plan Supplemental EIR;
• Adoption of required CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerati ons for the above action;
• Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and • Approval of the focused General Plan Update.

SUBSEQUENT USE OF THE EIR
This EIR provides a review of environmental effects associated with implementation of the proposed focused General Pl an Update, which amends the adopted Clovis General Plan . When considering approval of subsequent activities under the Clovis General Plan, the focused changes to the Circulation Element must be considered. As such, the City of Clovis would utilize this Supplemental EIR, in addition to the existing certified General Plan EIR, as the basis in determining potential environmental effects and the appropriate level of environmental review, if any, of a subsequent activity. Projects or activ ities successive to thi s Supplemental EIR, would be proposed under the adopted General Plan and may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Approval and funding of major projects and capital improvements; • Future Specific Plan, Planned Unit Development, or Master Plan approvals; • Annexations;
• Revisions to the Clovis Zoning Ordinance;
• Development plan approvals, such as tentative subdivision maps, variances, conditional use permits, and other land use permits;
• Development Agreements;
• Property rezoning consistent with the General Plan;
• Permit issuances and other approvals necessary for public and private development projects; and
• Issuance of permits and other approvals necessary for implementation of the General Plan.
184
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-12 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY APPROVALS
City approval of the pr oposed Project would not require any actions or approvals by other public agencies. However, because of the long -range planning nature of the proposed Project, the City would need to coordinate with other long range planning efforts by other agency that op erate regionally. These include, but are not necessarily limited to:
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) coordination regarding regional transportation planning efforts.
• Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG ) coordination regarding regio nal transportation planning efforts.
185
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sourc
e: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 2.0-1
Clovis Planning Area
LEGEND
186
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-14 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.
187
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Herndon Ave
Mc Call Ave
Sierra Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Bullard Ave
UV168
Alluvial Ave

FRIANT-KERN CANAL
Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
StateHwy168
AG: Agriculture (1 DU/20 Ac)
RR: Rural Residential
VL: Very Low Density Residential
(0.6-2.0 DU/Ac)
L: Low Density Residential
(2.1-4.0 DU/Ac)
M: Medium Density Residential
(4.1-7.0 DU/Ac)
MH: Medium High Density Residential
(7.1-15.0 DU/Ac)
H: High Density Residential
(15.1-25.0 DU/Ac)
VH: Very High Density Residential
(25.1-43.0 DU/Ac)
MU-V: Mixed Use Village
MU-BC: Mixed Use Business Campus
O: Office
I: Industrial
NC: Neighborhood Commercial
GC: General Commercial
OS: Open Space
P: Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
PK: Park
S: School
W: Water
C-SP: Special Commercial
PRC-FC: Planned Rural Community
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sourc
e: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 2.0-2
Land Use Diagram
LEGEND
Clovis City Limits
188
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-16 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.

189
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
Loma Vista
Heritage
Grove
Northeast
Urban Center
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Urban Centers
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sourc
e: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 2.0-3
Urban Centers
LEGEND
190
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-18 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.

191
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
1212
11 55
22 44
99 141477
33 66
1111
88 1313
1010
SP-1
SP-2
SP-4
SP-3
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Source: Cit
y of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
LEGEND
Specific Plan Areas
Focus Areas
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
Figure 2.0-4
Focus Areas
192
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-20 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.
193
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-1

This chapter describes the potential impacts to the transportation system associated with the General Plan Circulation Element Update. As previously discussed in Section 2.0, Project Description, the project would (1) update City Policy in the Circulation Element to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with Senate Bill 743 ( SB 743 ), (2) establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to meet the requirements of State law, and (3) ensure that updated City Policy and Guidelines should not obstruct and prevent the City from growing in accordance with the City’s existing plans for growth.

The impact analysis examines how proposed updates to City’s policies would impact the transportation system under the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA). To provide context for the impact analysis, this chapter begins with a discussion of the environmental setting, which is a description of the existing transportation system relative to CEQA criteria. Following the setting is the regulatory framework influencing the transportation system and providing the basis for impact significance thresholds used in the impact analysis. The chapter concludes with the impact analysis findings and recommended mitigation measures.

3.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This section provides a contextual background to the City’s existing transportation system relative to the relevant CEQA criteria . The proposed Project would not directly affect the physical transportation systems in the City of Clovis. Therefore, the environmental setting does not include the components of the physical transportation system.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is determined by multiplying the number of vehicular trips by the trip distance in miles. For example, one vehicle that travels ten miles in a day generates 10 VMT. For the purposes of this Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ( SEIR), VMT is expressed on a daily basis for a typical weekday. VMT values in this analysis represent the full length of a given trip and are not truncated at jurisdiction boundaries. Additionally, these VMT values are for trips beginning or ending in the City (i.e., are associated with land uses within Clovis and its SOI ). Trips passing through the City and SOI without stopping are not included in these VMT estimates, as the City has little or no control over such trips.

Although the absolute amount of VMT may be reported, transportation impact analysis is typically based on VMT expressed as an efficiency metric. VMT efficiency metrics, such as VMT per resident and VMT per employee, allow the VMT performance of different land use quantities to be compared. Such metrics provide a measure of travel efficiency and help depict whether people are traveling by vehicle more or less over time, across different areas, or across different planning scenarios. A per-capita or per-employee decline in VMT compared to a baseline condition indicates that the land use patterns and transportation network are operating more efficiently.

194
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Two measures of VMT are used in this analysis:

1. VMT per capita for residential land uses. Includes VMT for all trips produced by a dwelling unit’s residents, such as to work, school, or shop, on a typical weekday.

2. VMT per employee for non-residential land uses. Includes all trips made by employees at the non -residential land use on a typical weekday , not including visitors to the non - residential land use such as customers, patients or deliveries.

The regional activity-based travel demand model maintained by the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) is used to identify the VMT generated by land uses in Clovis as well as the entire county. The Fresno COG model also includes estimates of VMT for trips traveling to and from land uses within Fresno County but with one end of the trip outside Fresno County, such as a trip between Clovis and Bakersfield. These “external” trips are estimated to account for approximately 25 percent of VMT generated by residents of Fresno County and nearly 50 percent of VMT generated by employees in Fresno County.

VMT estimates for the 2019 baseline modelled conditions are shown in Table 3.1-1. In addition to the two metrics presented above, total VMT metrics are reported for information.

TABLE 3.1-1: DEMOGRAPHICS AND VMT, 2019 BASELINE CONDITIONS

UNITS FRESNO COUNTY CLOVIS

VMT PER CAPITA
Population 1,010,400 134,100
Residential VMT 16,267,400 2,159,000
VMT per Capita 16.1 16.1

VMT PER EMPLOYEE
Employees 404,100 36,500
Employee VMT 10,345,340 897,900
VMT per Employee 25.6 24.6

TOTAL VMT
Total VMT 25,693,300 2,687,400
SOURCES: FRESNO COG, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, 2022

3.1.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The General Plan , along with a variety of City, regional, State, and Federal plans, legislation, and policy directives provide guidelines for the safe operation of streets and transportation facilities in Clovis. While the City has primary responsibility for the maintenance and operation of local transportation facilities in its jurisdiction , Clovis staff works on a continual basis with responsible regional, State, and Federal agencies including County of Fresno, th e Fresno Council of Governments, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Federal Highway Administration, and others to maintain, improve, and balance the competing transportation needs of the community and the region.
195
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-3

FEDERAL
Federal Highway Administration
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the agency of the United States (US) Department of Transportation (DOT) responsible for the federally funded roadway system, including the interstate highway network and portions of the primary state highway network, such as State Route 168 (SR- 168) and State Route 41 (SR-41).

Federal Transit Administration
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is an authority that provides financial and technical assistance to local public transit systems, including buses, subways, light rail, commuter rail, trolleys, and ferries. The FTA is funded by Title 49 of the United States Code, which states the FTA’s interest in fostering the development and revitalization of public transportation systems.

STATE
Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 32, and Senate Bill 375
Assembly Bill (AB) 32, also known as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, committed California to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2016, Senate Bill (SB) 32 added a new target: reducing statewide emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

SB 375 provides guidance for curbing emissions from cars and light trucks to help California comply with AB 32. There are five major components to SB 375:

1. ARB will guide the adoption of GHG emission targets to be met by each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the state. The MPO for Clovis is the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG).

2. MPOs are required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting these regional targets. The SCS must be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

3. Regional housing elements and transportation plans must be synchronized on eight- year schedules. Also, the SCS and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) must be consistent with each other.

4. CEQA is streamlined for preferred development types such as mixed -use projects and transit-oriented developments (TODs) if they meet specific requirements.

5. MPOs must use transportation and air emission modeling methodologies consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC) guidelines.

Assembly Bill 417
In October 2013, AB 417 created a statutory CEQA exemption for bicycle plans in urbanized areas.

Before the passage of this bill, cities and counties that prepared bicycle plans were required to carry out a CEQA review. AB 417 exempts the following types of bicycle projects in an urbanized area:

1. Restriping of streets and highways
196
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

2. Bicycle parking and storage

3. Signal timing to improve intersection operations

4. Signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles
However, not all bicycle plans are exempt if cer tain conditions are met (e.g., a new Class I bicycle trail through a sensitive natural area).

Assembly Bill 1358
The California Complete Streets Act requires general plans updated after January 30, 2011, to include Complete Streets policies so that roadway s are designed to safely accommodate all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities, as well as motorists. From 2011 onward, any local jurisdiction —county or city —that undertakes a substantive update of the circulation element of its general plan must consider “complete streets” and incorporate corresponding policies and programs. “Complete streets” comprises a suite of policies and street design guidelines which provide for the needs of al l road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit operators and riders, children, the elderly, and the disabled.

Senate Bill 743
SB 743, passed in 2013, resulted in several statewide CEQA changes. It required the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to establish new metrics for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the metrics beyond TPAs. OPR selected VMT as the preferred transportation impact metric and applied their discretion to require its use statewide. This legislation also established that aesthetic and parking effects of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a TPA are not significant impacts on the environment. The revised CEQA Guidelines that implement this legislation became effective on December 28, 2018, and state that vehicle level of service (LOS) and similar measures related to vehicle delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts for land use projects, and that as of July 1, 2020, this requirement shall apply statewide.

The OPR “Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” (December 2018) includes specifications for VMT methodology and recommendations for significance thresholds, screening of projects that may be presumed to have less than significant impacts, and mitigation.

Screening criteria include:
- Small projects : The Technical Advisory concludes that, absent any information to the contrary, projects that generate 110 trips per day or less may be assumed to cause a le ss- than-significant transportation impact.
- Projects near transit stations : Projects located within ½ mile of an “existing major transit stop” or an “existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor” would have a less -than- significant impact on VMT.
- Affordable residential development: Projects consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be assumed to cause a less -than-significant transportation impact on VMT 197
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-5

because they may improve jobs-housing balance and/or otherwise generate less VMT than market-based units.
- Redevelopment projects : If a proposed redevelopme nt project leads to a net overall decrease in VMT (when compared against the VMT of the existing land uses), the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact. - Local-serving retail : Trip lengths may be shortened and VMT reduced by ad ding “local - serving” retail opportunities that improve retail destination proximity. Page 17 of the Technical Advisory generally describes retail development including stores less than 50,000 square feet as local -serving. In May 2020, OPR staff indicated d uring online webinars that any retail building that is 50,000 square feet or less may be considered local-serving.

Other key guidance includes:

1. VMT is the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact.

2. OPR recommends tour- and trip-based travel models to estimate VMT, but ultimately defers to local agencies to determine the appropriate tools.

3. OPR recommends measuring VMT for residential and office projects on a “per rate” basis.

Specifically, OPR recommends VMT per capita for res idential projects and VMT per employee for office projects.

4. OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is fifteen percent below that of existing development may be a reasonable threshold (page 10). In other words, an office project that generates VMT per employee that is more than 85 percent of the regional VMT per employee could result in a significant impact. OPR notes that this threshold is supported by evidence that connects this level of reduction to the State’s emissions goals (pages 1 0- 11).

5. For retail projects, OPR recommends measuring the net decrease or increase in VMT in the planning area with and without the project. The recommended impact threshold is any increase in total VMT.

6. Lead agencies ultimately have the discretion to set o r apply their own significance thresholds, provided they are based on significant evidence.

7. Cities and counties still have the ability to use measures of delay such as LOS for other plans, studies, or network monitoring. However, according to CEQA section 15064.3, Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts, “effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.”
California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals
ARB has specific guidance for VMT thresholds in the ARB 2017 “Scoping Plan -Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals” (January 2019). This document provides recommendations for VMT reduction thresholds that would be necessary to achieve the state’s GHG reduction goals and acknowledges that the SCS targets alone are not sufficient to meet climate goals. ARB concluded that a 14.3 -percent reduction in total VMT per capita and a 16.8 percent reduction in light -duty truck VMT per cap ita (over current conditions; 2015 -2018) was needed to 198
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

meet these goals. Additionally, the OPR “Technical Advisory” cites this document as support for the 15-percent reduction threshold.

California Air Resources Board 2018 Progress Report, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, California Air Resources Board
In the “2018 Progress Report, Calif ornia’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act” (November 2018), ARB charts recent VMT per capita trends and shows VMT per capita increasing in recent years. This trend is inconsistent with RTP/SCS projections across the state forecasting declines.

SOURCE: 2018 PROGRESS REPORT CALIFORNIA’S SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND CLIMATE PROTECTION ACT, CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD, 2018
Caltrans Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide
The Caltrans “Vehicle Miles Traveled -Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide” (TISG), dated May 20, 2020, was prepared to provide guidance to Caltrans districts, lead agencies, tribal governments, developers, and consultants regarding Caltrans’ review of VMT impact analysis for land use projects and land use plans. Caltrans seeks to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips, provide a safe transportation system, reduce per capita VMT, increase accessibility to destinations via cycling, walking, carpooling, and transit, and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) e missions. The TISG notes that, for land use projects and plans, automobile delay is no longer considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA. Caltrans’ primary review focus for a land use project’s transportation impacts is now VMT. The TISG generally endorses the OPR “Technical Advisory,” 199
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-7

including the thresholds in that document. Caltrans may review VMT thresholds, methodology, and mitigations.

Caltrans Interim Land Development and Intergovernmental Review (LDIGR) Safety Review Practitioners Guidance
The Interim LDIGR Safety Review Practitioners Guidance (July 2020) was developed to provide immediate direction about the safety review while final guidance is being developed. This interim guidance does not establish thresholds of s ignificance for determining safety impacts under CEQA.

The guidance notes that the significance of impacts should be determined with careful judgment on the part of a public agency and based, to the greatest extent possible, on scientific and factual data consistent with Caltrans’ CEQA guidance contained in Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference.

The guidance notes that District traffic safety staff will use available data to determine if the proposed project may influence or contribute to locations identified by traffic safety Investigations generated by network screening or initiated by the district.

Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1: Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System and Assembly Bill 1358: Complete Streets Act of 2008
In 2001, C altrans adopted Deputy Directive (DD) 64, a policy directive related to non -motorized travel throughout the state. In October 2008, DD 64 was strengthened to reflect changing priorities and challenges. DD 64-R1 states:

The Department views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.

The Department develops integrated multimodal projects in balance with community goals, plans, and values. Addressing the safety and mobility needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users in all projects, regardless of funding, is implicit in these objectives. Bicycle, pedestrian, and transit travel is facilitated by creating “complete streets” beginning early in system planning and continuing through project delivery and maintenance and operations.

Developing a network of “complete streets” requires collaboration among all Department functional units and stakeholders to establish effective partnerships.

Providing safe mobility for all users, including motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit riders, contributes to the Department's vision: "Improving Mobility Across California." Successful long-term implementation of this policy is intended to result in more options for people to go from one place to another, less traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, more walkable communities (with healthier, more active people), and fewer barri ers for older adults, children, and people with disabilities.

Economically, complete streets can help revitalize communities, and they can give families the option to lower transportation costs by using transit, walking, or bicycling rather than driving to reach their destinations. The Department is actively engaged in implementing its complete streets 200
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-8 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

policy in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities and products on the State Highway System.

In 2008, the State of California enacted Assembly Bill 1358, the Complete Streets Act of 2008. This law requires cities and counties, when updating their general plans, to ensure that local streets and roads meet the needs of all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, t ransit riders, children, seniors, persons with disabilities and motorists. The law took effect in January 2011, when the OPR issued new proposed General Plan guidelines that reflect Complete Streets planning principles. As described by OPR, complete streets should be designed and constructed to serve all users of streets, roads, and highways, regardless of their age or ability, or whether they are driving, walking, bicycling, or taking transit.

Caltrans Director’s Policy 22 (DP-22), Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions
Director’s Policy 22, a policy regarding the use of “Context Sensitive Solutions” on all state highways, was adopted by Caltrans in November of 2001. The policy reads:

The Department uses “Context Sensitive Solutions” as an approach to plan, design, construct, maintain, and operate its transportation system. These solutions use innovative and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic, and environmental values with transportation safety, ma intenance, and performance goals. Context sensitive solutions are reached through a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders.

The context of all projects and activities is a key factor in reaching decisions. It is considered for all State transportation and support facilities when defining, developing, and evaluating options. When considering the context, issues such as funding feasibility, maintenance feasibility, traffic demand, impact on alternate routes, impact on safety, and relevant laws, rules, and regulations must be addressed.

The policy recognizes that “in towns and cities across California, the State highway may be the only through street or may function as a local street,” that “these communities desire that their mai n street be an economic, social, and cultural asset as well as provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods,” and that “communities want transportation projects to provide opportunities for enhanced non-motorized travel and visual quality.” The policy acknowledges that addressing these needs will assure that transportation solutions meet more than just traffic and operational objectives.

OPR General Plan Guidelines
The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) publishes General Plan Guidelines as for cities and counties developing their general plans. OPR released its updated guidelines in 2017, which includes legislative changes, new guidance, policy recommendations, external links to resource documents, and additional resources. F or each general plan element, the guidelines discuss statutory requirements in detail, provide recommended policy language, and include examples of city and county general plans that have adopted similar policies. 201
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-9

REGIONAL
Fresno Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Community Strategy
The Fresno County Council of Governments (Fresno COG ) is a voluntary association of local governments and a regional planning agency comprised of 16 member jurisdictions, including the City of Cl ovis. The Fresno COG’s purpose is to establish a consensus on the needs of the Fresno County area and further action plans for issues related to the Fresno County region. The current Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Community Strategy (RTP/SCS) produced by Fresno COG was adopted in 2018, and a 2022 RTP/SCS is in the process of being adopted. The RTP/SCS sets forth regional transportation policy and provides capital program planning for all regional, state, and federally funded projects. The RTP addresses GHG emissions reductions and other air emissions related to transportation, with the goal of preparing for future growth in a sustainable way. The plan specifies how funding will be sourced and financed for the region’s planned transportation investments, ongoing operations, and maintenance.

Fresno County Transportation Authority and Measure C.

The Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA) is a regional agency that was created to administer the voter‐passed Measure C program in 1986. Measure C was a 20‐year program that achieved a half‐cent sales tax for transportation expenditures and infrastructure. After its 20‐year duration, the program was extended for another 20 years in 2006 and named the Measure C Extension Expenditure Plan. Through th is funding, the FCTA established goals and core values for utilizing these funds for not only building roads but also completion of added bike lanes; expansion of Fresno and Clovis transit; and support for transit, ridesharing, and vanpools.

Fresno County Congestion Management Process
As the designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Fresno County, Fresno COG is responsible for updating County’s Congestion Management Process (CMP) and monitoring its implementation. The Fresno Co unty CMP identifies four general objectives: (1) optimize the transportation facilities through efficient system management; (2) invest in strategies that reduce travel demand, improve system performance, increase safety, and provide effective incident management; (3) reduce VMT by encouraging alternative modes of transportation and promotion of sustainable land use development; and (4) improve public transit, extend bicycle and pedestrian systems, and promote car‐sharing and bike‐sharing programs to facilitate the development of an integrated multi‐modal transportation system in the Fresno region.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) SJVAPCD has implemented Rule 9410, Employer Based Trip Reduction. The purpose of this rule is to reduce VMT from private vehicles used by employees to commute to and from their worksites to reduce emissions of NOx, ROG, and particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5). The rule applies to employers with at least 100 employees. Employers are required to implement an Emplo yer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) for each worksite with 100 or more eligible employees to meet applicable targets specified in the rule. Employers are required to facilitate the participation of the development of ETRIPs by providing information to its employees explaining the requirements 202
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-10 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

and applicability of this rule. Employers are required to prepare and submit an ETRIP for each worksite to the District. The ETRIP must be updated annually. Under this rule, employers shall collect information on the modes of transportation used for each eligible employee’s commutes both to and from work for every day of the commute verification period, as defined in using either the mandatory commute verification method or a representative survey method. Ann ual reporting includes the results of the commute verification for the previous calendar year along with the measures implemented as outlined in the ETRIP and, if necessary, any updates to the ETRIP.

LOCAL
Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis adopted a c omprehensive General Plan Update on August 28, 2014. Since then, statewide transportation planning requirements have driven the need to amend the Circulation Element portion of the adopted General Plan. As such, the City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing General Plan that concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form.

CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
OVERARCHING GOAL: A comprehensive and well -maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through well -planned p edestrian connections and improved connectivity.

Goal 1: A context-sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs.

Policy 1.1 Multimodal network. The city shall plan, design, operate, and maintain the transportation network to promote safe and convenient travel for all u sers:
pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, freight, and motorists.

Policy 1.2 Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance t he comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Policy 1.3 Age and mobility . The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Policy 1.4 Jobs and housing. Encourage infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing, and vice versa, to reduce citywide ve hicle miles travelled and effectively utilize the existing transportation infrastructure, as well as promote carpooling whenever possible.

Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity . The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood-serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses). 203
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-11

Policy 1.6 Internal circulation. New development shall utilize a grid or modified-grid street pattern. Areas designated for residential and mixed-use village developments should feature short block lengths of 200 to 600 feet.

Policy 1.7 Narrow streets. The City may permit curb-to-curb dimensions that are narrower than current standards on local streets to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and enhance safety.

Policy 1.8 Network completion. New development shall complete the extension of stub streets planned to connect to adjacent streets, where appropriate.

Goal 2: A roadway network that is well planned, funded, and maintained.

Policy 2.1 Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:

1. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours

2. Allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
• Preserving agriculture or open space land
• Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood • Preserving or creating a pedestrian -friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts
• Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible Policy 2.2 Multimodal LOS. Monitor the evolution of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standards. The city may adopt MMLOS standards when appropriate.

Policy 2.3 Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.

Policy 2.4 Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right-of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation.

The City shall request the County of Fresno to apply the same re quirements in the Clovis planning area.

Policy 2.5 Regional and state roadway funding. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to fund roadway improvements adjacent to and within the City’s Planning Area.

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Development projects shall comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program. Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities f or establishing an in -lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.
204
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-12 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders. Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Goal 3: A multimodal transportation network that is safe and comfortable in the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1 Traffic calming. Employ traffic -calming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.

Policy 3.2 Neighborhood compatibility. Periodically review and update design standards to ensure that new and redesigned streets are compatible with the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3 Old Town and mixed use village centers. Transportation decisions on local streets in Old Town and mixed -use village centers shall prioritize pedestrians, then bicyclists, then mass transit, then motorists.

Policy 3.4 Road diets. Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.

Policy 3.5 Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or intersection expansions after considering multimodal alternative improvements to non -automotive facilities.

Policy 3.6 Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.

Policy 3.7 Conflict points. Minimize the number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.

Policy 3.8 Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.

Policy 3.9 Park-once. Encourage “park-once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well -marked access to sidewalks and businesses.

Policy 3.10 Pedestrian access and circulation. Entrances at signalized intersections sh ould provide sidewalks on both sides of the entrance that connect to an internal pedestrian pathway to businesses and throughout nonresidential parking lots larger than 50 spaces.

Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and ri ght-of-ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non-motorized transportation.
205
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-13

Policy 3.12 Residential orientation. Where feasible, residential development should face local and collector streets to increase visibility and safety of travelers along the streets, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access.

Goal 4: A well-planned and maintained pedestrian circulation network that promotes increased use of the City’s bicycle, and transit, and pedestrian system facilities in order to reduce that serves as a functional alternative to commuting by single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible car.

Policy 4.1 Bike and transit backbone. The bicycle and transit system should connect Shaw Avenue, Old Town, the Medical Center/R&T Park, and the three Urban Centers.

Policy 4.2 Priority for new bicycle facilities. Prioritize investments in the backbone system over other bicycle improvements.

Policy 4.3 Freeway crossings. Require separate bicycle and pedestrian crossings for n ew freeway extensions and encourage separate crossings where Class I facilities are planned to cross existing freeways.

Policy 4.4 Bicycles and transit. Coordinate with transit agencies to integrate bicycle access and storage into transit vehicles, bus stops, and activity centers.

Policy 4.5 Transit stops. Improve and maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit, and rider- friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy 4.6 Transit p riority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.

Policy 4.7 Bus rapid transit. Plan for bus rapid transit and t ransit-only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase.

Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents focusing on connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods, parks, trails, and goods and services.

Policy 5.1 Complete street amenities. Upgrade existing streets and design new streets to include co mplete street amenities, prioritizing improvements to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety , consistent with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan and other master plans.

Policy 5.2 Development-funded facilities. Require development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan Bicycle Transportation Plan when facilities are in or adjacent to the development.

Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in U rban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.
206
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-14 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Policy 5.4 Homeowner associations. The city may require homeowner associations to maintain pathways and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the homeowner association area.

Policy 5.5 Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity centers and to provide general pedestrian connectivity throughout the city.

Goal 6: Safe and efficient goods movement with minimal impacts on local roads and neighborhoods.

Policy 6.1 Truck routes. Plan and designate truck routes that minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Policy 6.2 Land use. Place industrial and warehousing businesses near freeways and truck routes to minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Goal 7: A regional transportation system that connects Clovis to the San Joaquin Valley region.

Policy 7.1 Clovis Avenue extension . Invest in the extension of Clovis Avenue north to Copper Avenue as funding is available.

Policy 7.2 Right-of-way for future extensions. Coordinate with Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to preserve future right -of-way for extending Clovis Avenue north of Copper Avenue to Auberry Road and futur e State Route 65.

Policy 7.3 San Joaquin River crossing. Collaborate with the Fresno Council of Governments and appropriate agencies to secure a San Joaquin River crossing between State Route 41 and North Fork Road.

Goal 8: Improve and enhance the circulation network in a manner that reduces VMT through improved connectivity by focusing on modes of transportation that promotes the reduction in the use of single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management. Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that promote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, employees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, co ntinue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people between residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes. Seek input from and/or p artner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to i mprove the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe and efficient travel lanes.
207
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-15

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial. Continue to explore opportunities for increased non -vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education. Explore the feasibility of a community outreach and education program that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non -vehicular mo des of transportation for commuting and recreation.

Policy 8.6 Employer commute programs. Work with businesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single -occupancy vehicle s, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on-site shower facilities, and perks for employees who commute.

Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines
The City of Clovis adopted guidelines for transportation impact analysis in July 2020 . The Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines document1 provides guidance to City of Clovis staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the city for the purpose of determining impacts under CEQA. It provides guidance for the two types of analysis that normally comprise a TIA report (1) CEQA Analysis, and (2) Local Transportation Analysis.

For the CEQA VMT analysis, the TIA guidelines define the quantitative methodology, significance thresholds, and mitigation measures for conducting the transportation analysis in accordance with the requirements of SB 743 primarily based on VMT metrics . For land development projects, VMT per capita or VMT per employee are used to determine impacts . The guidelines document defines specific methodologies, criteria and thresholds for several project types, and discusses potential mitigation measures that can be considered to reduce VMT.

Clovis Active Transportation Plan
The 2022 Active Transportation Plan (ATP) defines a clear vision for the city’s active transportation network and proposes a framework for implementing projects, programs, and policies to turn the vision into a reality. The ATP identifies strategies to improve safety and accessibility for active forms of travel such as walking and bicycling. It supplements other long-range plans and will help the City create a sustainable and multi-modal transportation network.

The plan includes the following goals.

1. Improve the safety of people walking and bicycling.

2. Develop a well-connected network of trails, walkways, and bikeways.

1 City of Clovis, “Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines,” July, 2020. 208
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-16 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

3. Create a network that allows people of all socioeconomic circumstances the ability to travel safely throughout the city without a car.

4. Increase access to recreation by providing access to trails, walkways, and bikeways.

5. Increase the share of people who walk or ride a bicycle to get to work, school, shopping, and other activities
The ATP includes a list of project recommendations with specific locations, facility types and priority for implementation to improve walking and bicycling infrastructure throughout Clovis.

Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area Transit Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) The Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area (FCMA) SRTP was adopted on June 24, 2021. It presents a bi- annual short-term operational, financial, and capital improvements for two transit providers: Fresno Area Express (FAX) and Clovis Transit . The purpose of the SRTP is to promote a comprehensive, coordinated, and continuous planning process for transit service in the FCMA over the planning horizon.

3.1.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

METHODS OF ANALYSIS
The SEIR focuses on the potentially significant environmental effects that may result from updates to the Circulation Element, including those future projects developed under the Circulation Element.

This SEIR also focuses on the new information that was not available at the time that the certified General Plan EIR was prepared. The potential impacts were identified based on a set of significance criteria consistent with the CEQA Guidelines. Because SB 743 eliminated the use of LOS for CEQA impact analysis purposes, it is not included in this chapter. The EIR for the General Plan certified in 2014 included a comprehensive evaluation of the transportation system related to roadway capacity and LOS. This chapter provides an analysis of potential transportation impacts under current CEQA criteria.

Travel Demand Model
Forecasts of regional travel by various modes, r egional average VMT per capita and VMT per employee values are determined using the Fresno COG regional travel model. The travel demand model is a set of mathematical procedures and equations that represent the variety of transportation choices that people make, and how those choices result in trips on the transportation network.

The Fresno COG regional travel model is an activity -based model that simulates the County’s population, based on detailed Census data, and models the daily activity patterns of each simulated individual along with resulting travel demand . The daily activity patterns in the travel model are based on a statistical analysis of a household travel survey, where a representative sample of households were asked to track al l daily activities and trips by all members of their household. A simulated travel tour might consist of, for example, travel from the home to the gym to work to supermarket to home in a typical weekday. The travel model was calibrated to these surveyed travel patterns, and also validated by its ability to replicate counted traffic volumes, transit ridership, and 209
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-17

total Fresno County VMT from the Highway Performance Measurement System (HPMS) which is based on traffic counts.

The model presumes that future background travel options and behaviors remain similar to current conditions and does not explicitly account for potential changes associated with disruptive trends, emerging technologies, and changes in travel preferences. The model also does not assume a significant increase in working at home compared to 2019 baseline conditions.

LAND USE
The Fresno travel model requires land uses to be defined for each geographic area in the county.

The model defines land uses in micro -analysis zones (MAZs) which represent subareas of neighborhoods similar to Census blocks. The model also aggregates land uses to the more traditional transportation analysis zones (TAZs) which are typically bounded by major arterial or collector streets and are generally closer to the scale of Census tracts. The model land use inputs include numbers of households and employees by employment category, as well as enrollment at schools.

Fresno COG had defined a 2042 land use forecast for the RTP/SCS based on regional economic forecasts. This forecast was generally consistent with the allowable land uses in the Clovis General Plan, but assumes that little or no development would occur in a number of Clovis SOI areas by 2042.

In order to more completely assess the transportation impacts of the current General Plan, a revised future forecast was prepared for this SEIR.

The future land use forecasts are consistent with the current General Plan land use map, as are the Fresno COG 2042 RTP/SCS forecasts . The project team worked with City staff to confirm more specific assumptions for areas designated for Specific Plans and/or mixed -use development. A detailed mapping of parcels and allowable development was compiled to determine the maximum buildout potential of each parcel and planning area. The assumed development densities were then adjusted to provide a “most likely” scenario for General Plan development. The assumed development densities were set at typical suburban development densities except for Specific Plan areas designated for higher den sity development, in which case assumed average densities were approximately double the typical suburban values.

Table 3.1-2 summarizes the assumed 2042 General Plan land uses compared to the 2019 baseline. 210
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-18 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

TABLE 3.1-2: CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
LAND USE 2019 BASELINE GENERAL PLAN 2042

BUILDOUT

INCREASE (GENERAL PLAN
VS. 2019 BASELINE)

HOUSING UNITS
Single family 38,560 76,590 +99%
Multi family 7,520 36,640 +387%
Total 46,080 113,230 +146%

NON-RESIDENTIAL

SQUARE FEET
Commercial n/a 17,327,000
Office n/a 17,006,000
Industrial n/a 16,826,000
Public n/a 546,000
Total n/a 113,230
EMPLOYEES 37,980 128,100 +237%
SOURCE: KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, 2022
VMT Metrics and Thresholds
For land use plans such as specific plans, community plans, and general plan updates, consistent with OPR’s recommendations, the City requires comparing the applicable VMT thresholds (such as VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee) described in Section 2.1.3 under existing conditions with the applicable VMT metrics for the expected horizon year for the land use plan. If there is a net increase in the applicable VMT metrics under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact.

The VMT per capita includes all trips made by residents, including their trips while away from home, but does not include trips visiting residences (e.g., trips made by delivery vans). The regional average VMT per capita is calculated by summing the vehicle mileage (excluding trips made by transit, bicycle or walking) for all trips made by Fresno County residents, and dividing by the county population.

The VMT per employee includes trips made by employees to and from their workplaces, including trips to and from points other than the employees’ homes, but does not include visitors to the employment sites. The regional average VMT per employee is calculated by summing the vehicle mileage (excluding trips made by transit, bicycle or walking) for all trips made by Fresno County employees, and dividing by the total number of employees in the county.

Consistent with the City’s TIA Guidelines, two measures of VMT are used in this analysis:

1. VMT per capita. Includes VMT for trips produced by a dwelling unit’s residents, such as to work, school, or shop, and with one end of the trip at the home, on a typical weekday. This metric is normally used for residential land uses.

2. VMT per employee. Includes all trips with one end at the land use, including trips by both employees, customers, and deliveries, on a typical weekday. This metric is normally used for non-residential land uses.

For informational purposes the total VMT, which includes all trips with at least one end in the planning area on a typical weekday, was provided.
211
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-19

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, adoption and/or implementation of the Circulation Element update would result in significant impacts under CEQA, if any of the following would occur:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressi ng the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b) c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) d. Result in inadequate emergency access
Transit, Bicycles, and Pedestrians
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that impacts may be significant if a project conflicts with a program, p lan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The proposed Circulation Element Update would have a significant impact on transit, bicycles, or pedestrians if it would conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding these systems, or create or exacerbate disruptions to the performance or safety of these systems.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the General Plan could result in a signifi cant transportation impact if it would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), which states for land use projects, “Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact.” CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)(4) states, “A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology 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.”
According to the City’s TIA Guidelines, t he City has selected to measure VMT and adopted the following thresholds by land use type:
• Residential: A proposed project exceeding a level of 13 percent below existing average VMT per capita in Fresno County.
• Office: A proposed project exceeding a level of 13 percent below existing average VMT per employee in Fresno County.
• Retail: A net increase in total VMT. The total VMT for the region without and with the project is calculated. The difference between the two scenarios is the net change in total VMT that is attributable to the project.
• Other land uses: The City will make a determination of the applicable thresholds on a case- by-case basis based on the land use type, project description, and setting. Research and development, medical offices, assisted living, and industrial projects may be evaluated similar to office projects using the VMT per employee metric. Projects such as religious 212
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-20 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

institutions, regional parks, hotels, private schools and medical offices may be evaluated using the net VMT criteria similar to retail projects.
• Mixed-Use Projects: Evaluate each component of a mixed -use project independ ently and apply the significance threshold for each land use type. Alternatively, the evaluation would apply only the project’s dominant use.
• Land use plans: For land use plans such as specific plans, community plans, and general plan updates, consistent w ith OPR’s recommendations, the City requires comparing the applicable VMT thresholds (such as VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee) with the applicable VMT metrics for the expected horizon year for the land use plan. If there is a net increase in the applicable VMT metrics under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact.

The Fresno County Council of Governments (Fresno COG)2 has set a goal to reduce3 GHG emissions by 13% per capita by 2035 as a target for the Fresno region . Therefore, using a threshold of 13% below average VMT for residential and office projects is consistent with established regional GHG emission goals. With these considerations, the City has selected a threshold of 13 percent below baseline VMT per capita (for residential land uses) or employee (employment-related land uses) by land use type. Therefore, if any of the VMT metrics above under General Plan conditions exceed 87 percent of the same value under 2022 Baseline Conditions, VMT impacts on transportation may be considered significant. VMT thresholds by land use type are shown in Table 3.1-3.

TABLE 3.1-3: VMT THRESHOLDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

LAND USE UNITS REGIONAL BASELINE THRESHOLD
Residential VMT per capita 16.1 14.0
Office VMT per employee 25.6 22.3
SOURCE: KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES 2022
Hazards and Emergency Access
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that impacts may be significant if a project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Impacts may also be significant if a project results in inadequate emergency access. The proposed Circulation Element Update would have a significant impact on the transportation system if it would increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access.

2 SB 375 Greenhouse Emission Reduction Target for the Fresno County Region, Fresno Council of Governments, April 25, 2017.
3 From 2010 levels.
213
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-21

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.1 -1: General Plan implementation would not conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities (No Impact) Implementation of the Circulation Element update would primarily adopt goals and policies to promote a reduction in VMT on a per capita basis . The City adopted an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) that establishes the City’s goals and objective s for pedestrian and bicycle travel. The ATP establishes standards for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and identifies planned bicycle and pedestrian network facilities to address the City’s bicycle and pedestrian needs. The Circulation Element update contains several policies in support of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities such as Policy 1.1 (Multimodal network), Policy 4.1 (Bike and transit backbone), Policy 4.2 (Priority for new bicycle facilities), Policy 4.4 (Bicycles and transit), Policy 5.1 (Complete Street amenities), Policy

5.5 (Pedestrian access), which support bicycle and pedestrian routes and facilities. In addition, Policy

5.2 (Development -funded facilities) specifically requires development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan.

The Circulation Element update would not conflict with adopted programs, plans, policies, or ordinances that address the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

A review of the Circulation Plan including its proposed networks and policies revealed no potential policy inconsistencies or conflicts with policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities or the performance or safety of those facilities. The General Plan incorporates future networks and policies relate d to supporting transit, bicycle, and pedestrians in the City and SOI. These networks are consistent with regional and local planning efforts supporting these modes of travel. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Impact 3.1-2: General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable)
The following thresholds of significance are used to evaluate potential VMT impacts w ith implementation of the GPU:
• Residential land uses: 13% below the region’s baseline year average VMT per capita. For the purpose of this analysis, the applicable region is Fresno County. • Office/employment land uses : 13% below the region’s average VMT pe r employee under baseline conditions.

A value of VMT per capita or VMT per employee with the Circulation Element update exceeding the respective threshold (13% below the applicable baseline) would be considered a significant impact.

VMT was calculated for the Clovis General Plan area including current city limits and the sphere of influence (SOI). Table 3.1-4 summarizes the total citywide VMT for the 2019 baseline, the applicable threshold, and the future VMT with the estimated development under the General Plan. As shown in the table, 2042 conditions with the Circulation Element update would result in decreased VMT 214
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-22 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

per capita and VMT per employee in comparison to the 2019 baseline condition in Clovis. Residential VMT per capita would decrease by 5%, from 16.1 to 15.3, but would still be above the impact threshold of 14.0. Non -residential VMT per employee would decrease by 18%, from 24.6 to 20.1, and would be below the impact threshold of 22.3.

The reductions indicate that future development, in particular planned mixed-use development, will provide more opportunities for Clovis residents and employees to access jobs and services within the city and within shorter distances. The shorter trip distances reduce VMT by vehicles, and also increase the likelihood that trips will be made by non-auto modes such as bicycling and walking.

TABLE 3.1-4 VMT RESULTS SUMMARY
UNITS FRESNO CO. 2019 CLOVIS 2019 CLOVIS 2042

VMT PER CAPITA
Population 1,010,400 134,100 355,100
Residential VMT 16,267,400 2,159,000 5,440,900
VMT per Capita 16.1 16.1 15.3
Impact Threshold 14.0 14.0 14.0

VMT PER EMPLOYEE
Employees 404,100 36,500 128,100
Employee VMT 10,345,340 897,900 2,576,600
VMT per Employee 25.6 24.6 20.1
Impact Threshold 22.3 22.3 22.3

TOTAL VMT
Total VMT 25,693,300 2,687,400 5,515,700
SOURCES: FRESNO COG, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, 2022
In summary, implementation of the General Plan would result in total citywide VMT per capita above applicable thresholds and total citywide VMT per employee below the threshold. VMT per capita or per employee is largely a function of land use patterns, and integrated transportation infrastructure, with some effect specifically attributed to social behaviors/preferences. These characteristics can vary within a geographic area. For instance, in Clovis s everal areas of the city have existing, or planned, mixed use developments ( housing, retail, offices, and community facilities ) that are integrated or proximate to each other. With the land uses being closer in mixed use developments, the trip lengths for residents/employees traveling to work, home, or services is reduced. When you combine a well-planned circulation network that promotes easy access via bicycle, pedestrian and public transit, there are opportunities for further reductions in VMT as a result of choices by some residents/employees to shift their travel to non-motorized travel. Such mixed-use land use patterns tend to have a positive effect when it comes to reducing VMT per capita for people living and working in those areas. To the contrary, several areas of the City have existing, or planned, uses that are less mixed, and are more isolated and distant from other uses that serve residents /employees living in the area. The more separated, or isolated, housing is from retail, offices, and community facilities, the greater the trip lengths will be for those individuals. This will result in higher VMT per capita for people living in those areas.

Figure 3.1-1 shows the different values of future projected VMT per capita for TAZs within the Clovis SOI, and Figure 3.1-2 shows the same type of information for VMT per employee.

215
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-23

216
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-24 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

217
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-25

While total VMT per capita in the Clovis SOI is projected to have an overall exceedance of the impact threshold, it is noted that the VMT per capita for residential uses in some areas is projected to be below the impact threshold once all General Plan land uses are implemented. These include some currently developed areas, particularly in the southwest part of the city closer to goods and services, as well as some new development areas in the north and northeast portions of the SOI where mixed- use development is proposed. It is also noted that the VMT per capita for residential uses in some areas is projected to exceed the impact threshold once all General Plan land uses are implemented.

These include some currently developed areas, but is predominately areas of new development in the northern and southern portion of the city which is generally farther from established services.

As individual land use development projects are implemented consistent with the General Plan , a focused project-specific VMT analysis may determine if the VMT per capita or per employee for that individual project exceed the impact threshold.
- The base year VMT screening maps associated with the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines may be us ed to identify if a project is in a current low VMT area and can be screened from VMT analysis.
- For land use projects which are not screened out based on the base year VMT mapping, and require further VMT analysis, Figures 3.1-1 and 3.1-2 can provide an indication if a focused VMT analysis for a development project is likely to result in a less -than-significant VMT impact with future development conditions.

VMT per capita is not static, rather it is a very dynamic metric that is affected by many variables specific to an individual project, with land use patterns being one of the most influential variables.

It is anticipated that a VMT analysis for most future project proposals would generally fit the VMT per capita expectations illustrated in Figure 3.1 -1 and 3.1-2, and many will screen out . However, it is also anticipated that there will be future project proposals that do not screen out, and that the VMT analysis will show an exceedance of the threshold. All projects will be required to comply with the policies of the Circulation Element, and implement mitigation measures that are relevant and feasible. However, it is anticipated that even with consistency with the Circulation Element policies, and implementation of mitigation measures, there will be signif icant and unavoidable impacts associated with development of individual projects that exceed the applicable VMT threshold.

General Plan policies and options for mitigation are discussed further below.

The Circulation Element update goals and policies are intended to reduce VMT. The overarching goal for the Circulation Element is “a comprehensive and well-maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through well -planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.” The following is a list of new policies added to the Circulation Element Update that would promote a reduction in VMT:

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled . Development projects shall comply with the City’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.
218
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-26 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program . Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigat ion fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in -lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders . Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explor e VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management . Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that promote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, emplo yees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, continue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people between residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes . Partner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to improve the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe and efficient travel lanes.

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial . Continue to explore opportunities for increased non -vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education . Explore the feasibility of a community outreach and education program that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non -vehicular modes of transportation for commuting and recreation.

Policy 8.6 Employer commute programs . Work with b usinesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single -occupancy vehicles, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on-site shower facilities, and perks for employees who commute.

Implementing the goals and policies presented above are intended to promote accessibility, encourage non-vehicle transportation modes, expand transit services, and develop TDM program requirements that reduce VMT associated with new development. When implemented, these types of policies can influence social behaviors by presenting a resident/employee with more transportation choices. The more times non -motorized transportation choices are selected as a method of travel, the more reduction in VMT per capita will be observed within the population.

While these policies can help to reduce the VMT per capita and VMT per employee, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole . As previously stated, land use patterns are one of the most influential variables affecting VMT per capita. The Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use patterns of the General Plan, rather, it is an accommodative policy document intended to facilitate 219
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-27

efficient transportation within the framework of the land use patterns defined in the Land Use Element.

It is anticipated that the development of the General Plan as a whole, as well as individual projects, will not be able to fully mitigate VMT per capita to below thresholds of significance. The following mitigation measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in order to mitigate the VMT impacts to the extent feasible. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this impact.

This impact will remain Significant and Unavoidable.

MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure TRANS -1: Implement a Commute Trip Reduction Program: The City shall implement a commute trip program applicable to all or selected employers in the City of Clovis. The criteria for inclusion in the commute trip reduction program are to be determined by the City, and could be based on building size, square footage of retail uses above the amount that qualifies to be screened out as local -serving, number of potential e mployees and/or other criteria that are appropriate for participation in the program. The program would include the following components that may be applicable for existing land uses and new land use development projects:
• trip reduction targets
• measures to discourage single occupancy vehicles while encouraging alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling , ridesharing , vanpooling, subsidized transit passes and other benefits,
• include a guaranteed ride home for eligible employers, • establish applicable fees and funding mechanisms,
• define monitoring measures and frequency, and strategies for non-compliance.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -2: Support the Implem entation of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) for Focused Areas: The City shall identify focused areas to implement TMAs via public-private partnerships to support the implementation, management and monitoring of transportation demand management (TDM) programs. Transportation Management Associations are non-profit, member-controlled organizations that provide transportation services in a particular area, such as a commercial district, mall, medical center or industrial park. They generally consist of area businesses with local government support. TMAs provide an institutional framework for T DM programs and services. They are usually more cost effective than programs managed by individual businesses. TMAs allow small employers to provide Commute Trip Reduction services comparable to those offered by large companies. The main goal for TMAs in C lovis would be to maximize the reduction of VMT. Implementation of TMAs may consist of the following:
• Identify focused areas and Specific Plans that would have the density and mix of land uses compatible with multimodal travel and adoption of TDM, as well as the potential to enter development and funding agreements with the City for TMA support. 220
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-28 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

• Provide seed funding and work with applicants to develop service agreements for the development of TMAs.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -3: Provide Bicycle Facilities: The City shall require land uses that generate more than 500 daily trips (which is the threshold that screens small projects from a detailed VMT analysis) to provide bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers. Th is measure is designed to promote commuting by bicycle and support transit first/last mile access. Bicycle facilities shall be required to be constructed in conjunction with each project and funded by the applicant.

Mitigation Measure TRANS -4: Improve Street Connectivity: The City shall require new area plans and new housing projects to provide a well-connected street network, particularly for non-motorized connections. Increased intersection density, alleyways, and mid-block pedestrian crossings may be a proxy for street connectivity and accessibility to connect a variety of land uses . Characteristics of street network connectivity include short block lengths, numerous three and four-way intersections, and minimal dead-ends (cul-de-sacs). Street connectivity helps to facilitate shorter vehicle trips and greater numbers of walk and bike trips and thus a reduction in VMT.

SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
VMT reduction depends on factors such as actual implementation of planned land use development, demographic change, household preferences for housing types and locations, the cost of fuel, and the competitiveness of transit relative to driving, which relates to congestion along vehicular commute routes that are not under the City’s jurisdiction, as well as trans it provided by agencies other than the City. The feasibility and effectiveness of the mitigation measures is unknown at this time. The City cannot demonstrate definitively at this time that implementation of these policies would achieve VMT reductions to meet the VMT per capita threshold. With implementation of the Circulation Element policies and the recommended mitigation measures, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Significance With Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.1-3: General Plan implementation may increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access (Less than Significant)
Implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would result in new roadways and new bicycle, pede strian and transit routes, and would increase the number of users on the city’s transportation system. There will be a need to ensure that hazards are not increased with the construction of new facilities and new users, and that adequate emergency access provisions are made to accommodate increased population and growth.

It is noted that the Circulation Element update is a programmatic-level document, which does not include actual design or construction of circulation facilities. H azards are typically assessed at the project-level when an actual design and construction of a circulation facility is proposed . Potential impacts associated with future development projects would be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the environmental review process for those later projects . The City’s design and 221
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.1

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 3.1-29

construction standards and specifications provide for coordinated and standardized development of City facilities, including roadways. The standards apply to, regulate, and guide the design and preparation of plans, and the construction of streets, highways, alleys, drainage, traffic signals, site access, and related public improvements.

The Circulation Element update contains policies in support of safe circulation by all modes , including requirements that ro adways are designed consistent with City standards, designed to provide adequate emergency access and address safety concerns. The Circulation Element includes policies to minimize the number and enhance safety at vehicular conflict points (Policy 3.7), and to partner with advocacy groups to improve design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage safe travel (Policy 8.3).

Implementation of General Plan policies would ensure that each future project would ensure have a less than significant related to circulation, hazards, and emergency access.

222
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

3.1-30 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
223
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS 4.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 4.0-1

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate a project's effects in relationship to broader changes occurring, or that are reasonably foreseeable to occur, in the surrounding environment. Accordi ngly, this chapter presents a discussion of CEQA -mandated analysis for cumulative impacts, significant irreversible effects, and significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed Project.

4.1 CUMULATIVE SETTING AND IMPACT ANALYSIS

INTRODUC TION
CEQA requires that an EIR contain an assessment of the cumulative impacts that could b e associated with the proposed P roject. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(a), “an EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incre mental effect is cumulatively considerable.” “Cumulatively considerable” is defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15065(a)(3) as meaning that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past p rojects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects ” (as de scribed in Section 15130). As defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15355, a cumulative impact consists of an impact that is created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR together with other projects causing related impacts. A cumulative impact occurs from:
…the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related pas t, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.

In addition, Section 15130(b) identifies that the following three eleme nts are necessary for an adequate cumulative analysis:
1) Either:
(A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency; or, (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. Such plans may include: a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. A summary of projections may also be contained in an adopted or certified prior environmental document for such a plan. Such projections may be supplemented with additional information such as a r egional modeling program. Any such document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency. 224
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

4.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS

4.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

2) A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to add itional information stating where that information is available; and
3) A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects. An EIR shall examine reasonable, feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project’s contribution to any significant cumulative effects.

Where a lead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not “cumulatively considerable,” a lead agency need not consider that effect significant, but shall briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable.

CUMULATIVE SETTING
The cumulative setting for this analysis is defined by the Fresno COG 2042 land use forecast for the RTP/SCS based on regional economic forecasts, with a revised forecast to account for more anticipated development in a number of Clovis SOI areas by 2042. A detailed mapping of parcels and allowable development was compiled to determine the maximum buildout potential of each parcel and planning area. Table 4.1 summarizes the cumulative 2042 General Plan land uses.

TABLE 4.1: CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
LAND USE 2019 BASELINE GENERAL PLAN 2042

BUILDOUT

INCREASE (GENERAL PLAN
VS. 2019 BASELINE)

HOUSING UNITS
Single family 38,560 76,590 +99%
Multi family 7,520 36,640 +387%
Total 46,080 113,230 +146%

NON-RESIDENTIAL

SQUARE FEET
Commercial n/a 17,327,000
Office n/a 17,006,000
Industrial n/a 16,826,000
Public n/a 546,000
Total n/a 113,230
EMPLOYEES 37,980 128,100 +237%
SOURCE: KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, 2022

CUMUL ATIVE EFF ECTS OF THE PROJECT
Method of Analysis
Although the environmental effects of an individual project may not be significant when that project is considered separately, the combined effects of several projects may be significant when considered collectively. State CEQA Guidelines 15130 requires a reasonable analysis of a project's cumulative impacts, which are defined as "two or more individual effects which, when considered together are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." The cumulative impact that results from several closely related projects is: the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other 225
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS 4.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 4.0-3

closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable prob able future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time (State CEQA Guidelines 15355[b]). Cumulative impact analysis may be less detailed than the analysis of the project's individual effects (State CEQA Guidelines 15130[b]).

There are two approaches to identifying cumulative projects and the associated impacts. The list approach identifies individual projects known to be occurring or proposed in the surrounding ar ea in order to identify potential cumulative impacts. The projection approach uses a summary of projections in adopted General Plans or related planning documents to identify potential cumulative impacts. This EIR uses a projection approach for the cumulat ive analysis and considers the proposed Project in light of buildout of the General Plan.

Project Assumptions
The proposed Project’s contribution to environmental impacts under cumulative conditions is based on implementation of General Plan policies and the TIA Guidelines. See Chapter 2.0, Project Description, for a complete description of the proposed Project.

Cumulative Impacts

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This section considers the impacts of the Project within the context of long-term traffic conditions that may accompany the development of regional circulation system improvements and regional residential and non-residential development.

Impact 4.1: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities (Less than Significant and Less than Cumulatively Considerable )
The Circulation Element of the 2014 Clovis General Plan is being updated to comply with ch anges in state law as it relates to VMT . The Circulation Element update would not conflict with adopted programs, plans, policies, or ordinances . The Circulation Element update itself addresses transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. A review of the Circulation Element including its proposed networks and policies revealed no potential policy inconsistencies or conflicts with policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities or the performance or safety of those f acilities. Implementation of the Circulation Element update would have no impact relative to this topic.

Impact 4. 2: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may resul t in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 perc ent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable and Cumulatively Considerable ) Cumulative VMT was calculated for the Clovis General Plan area including current city limits and the sphere of influence (SOI). Residential VMT per capita would decrease by 5%, from 16.1 to 15.3, 226
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

4.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS

4.0-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

but would still be above the impact threshold of 14.0. Non -residential VMT per employee would decrease by 18%, from 24.6 to 20.1, and would be below the impact threshold of 22.3. VMT is largely a function of land use patterns, and integrated transportation infrastructure.

It is noted that there are some areas of the city with existing, or planned, mixed use developments (housing, retail, offices, and com munity facilities) that will have reduced VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average, while other areas will have elevated VMT per capita when compared to the cumulative average. Implementing the goals and policies from the Circulation Element are intended to promote accessibility, encourage non -vehicle transportati on modes, expand transit services, and develop T ransportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirements that reduce VMT associated with new development. When implemented, these types of policies are anticipated to influence social behaviors by presentin g a resident/employee with more transportation choices. The more times non -motorized transportation choices are selected as a method of travel, the more reduction in cumulative VMT per capita will be observed within the population.

While these policies are expected to help reduce the cumulative VMT, it is not anticipated that they would be sufficient to achieve the reduction of 13% below existing baseline for the City as a whole. Additionally, the Circulation Element Update does not affect the land use pat terns of the General Plan. The following mitigation measures would be required in conjunction with the development of land use and infrastructure projects under the General Plan in or der to mitigate the VMT impacts to the extent feasible. However, there ar e no feasible mitigation measures that would fully mitigate this cumulative impact. This impact will remain significant and unavoidable and cumulatively considerable.

Impact 4. 3: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access (Less than Significant and Less than Cumulatively Considerable) Hazards are typically assessed at the proj ect-level when an actual design and construction of a circulation facilit y is proposed. Potential impacts associated with future development projects would be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the environmental review process for those later project s. The City’s design and construction standards and specifications provid e for coordinated and standardized development of City facilities, including roadways. The standards apply to, regulate, and guide the design and preparation of plans, and the constru ction of streets, highways, alleys, drainage, traffic signals, site access, and related public improvements.

The Circulation Element update contains policies in support of safe circulation by all modes, including requirements that roadways are designed con sistent with City standards, designed to provide adequate emergency access and address safety concerns. The Circulation Element includes policies to minimize the number and enhance safety at vehicular conflict points (Policy 3.7), and to partner with advoc acy groups to improve design, location, and functionality of bicycle lane s to encourage safe travel (Policy 8.3). The Circulation Element update does not include actual design or construction of circulation facilities.
227
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS 4.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 4.0-5

Implementation of General Plan policies would ensure that each future project would ensure have a less than significant and less than cumulatively considerable impact relative to this topic.

4.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
EIRs for certain kinds of projects, as set f orth in CEQA Guidelines section 15127, must discuss significant irreversi ble environmental changes. These projects include those involving (i) the adoption, amendment, or enactment of a plan, policy, or ordinance of a public agency, (ii) the adoption by a Local Agency Formation Commission of a resolution making determinations, or (iii) the parallel preparation of an environmental impact statement under the federal National Environmental Policy Act.

Here, the proposed Project falls into one of these categor ies, in that it requires the adoption or amendments of plans, policies, a nd ordinances. Irreversible environmental effects are described as:
• The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; • The primary and secondary impacts of a proj ect would generally commit future generations to similar uses (e.g., a highway provides access to previously remote area); • The project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project; or • The phasing of the proposed consumption of resources is not jus tified (e.g., the project involves the wasteful use of energy).

Determining whether the proposed Project would result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed such that there woul d be little possibility of restoring them. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.

Analysis
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the conversion of land currently for the developm ent of residential and commercial uses. Implementation of the proposed Project would not constitute a long -term commitment to any land uses . There would not be resources such as energy, human resources, lumber and other forest products, sa nd and gravel, asphalt, petrochemicals, and metals that would need to be committed to implementing the proposed Project. Overall, implementation of the proposed Project would have no significant irreversible effects.

4.3 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b) requires an EIR to discuss unavoidable significant environmental effects, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of insignificance. The following significant and unavoidable impacts of the prop osed Project are 228
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

4.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS

4.0-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

discussed in Sections 3.1 and previously in this chapter (cumulative -level). Refer to those discussions for further details and analysis of the significant and unavoi dable impact identified below:
• Impact 3.1 -2: General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable)
• Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater t han the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable and Cumulatively Considerable) 229
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 5.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 5.0-1

5.1 CEQA REQUIREMENTS
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyze a reasonable range of feasible alternatives that would feasibly attain most o f the basic objectives of the project while reducing or avoiding one or more significant environmental effects of the project. The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires an EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). Where a potential alternative was examined but not chosen as one of the range of alternatives, the CEQA Guidelines require that the EIR briefly discuss the reasons the alternative was dismissed.

Alternatives that are eva luated in the EIR must be potentially feasible alternatives. However, not all possible alternatives need to be analyzed. An EIR must “set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice.” (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(f).) The CEQA Guidelines provide a definition for a “range of reasonable alternatives” and, thus limit the number and type of alternatives that need to be evaluated in an EIR.

First and foremost, alternatives in an EIR must be potentially feasible. In the context of C EQA, “feasible” is defined as:
… capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors. (CEQA Guidelines 15364)
The inclusion of an alte rnative in an EIR is not evidence that it is feasible as a matter of law, but rather reflects the judgment of lead agency staff that the alternative is potentially feasible. The final determination of actual feasibility will be made by the lead agency deci sion-making body through the adoption of CEQA Findings at the time of action on the Project. ( California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 999 -1001 (CNPS); Mira Mar Mobile Community v. City of Oceanside (2004) 119 Cal.A pp.4th 477, 489 ; see also CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15091(a)) (3) [findings requirement, where alternatives can be rejected as infeasible ]; 15126.6 [([an EIR] must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decisio n making and public participation” ].) The following factors may be taken into consideration in the assessment of the feasibility of alternatives: site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plan or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and the ability of the proponent to attain site control (Section 15126.6 (f) (1)).

In addition, agency decisionmakers, in assessing actual feasibility, may legitimately consider whether particular altern atives, compared with a proposed Project, represent an undesirable balance of competing policy considerations or fail to attain project objectives to the same degree as a proposed Project. (See City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410 , 417 [“‘feasibility’ under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors”]; 230
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

5.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

5.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

CNPS, supra, 177 Cal.App.4th at p. 1001[same]; San Diego Citizenry Group v. County of San Diego (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 1 , 17 [same]; Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1506-1509 [upholding CEQA findings rejecting alternatives in reliance on applicant’s project objectives]; Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2012) 296 Cal.App.4th 296, 314 -315 [court upholds agency action where alternative selected “entirely fulfill” a particular project objective and “would be ‘substantially less effective’ in meeting” the lead agency’s “go als”]; and In re Bay -Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1165, 1166 (Bay -Delta) [“feasibility is strongly linked to achievement of each of the primary program objectives”; “a lead agency may struct ure its EIR alternative analysis around a reasonable definition of underlying purpose and need not study alternatives that cannot achieve that basic goal”].)
Equally important to the formulation of a reasonable range of alternatives in an EIR is the need f or alternatives to substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects of a proposed Project.

Although the law does not require agencies to exclusively focus in this context on the significant unavoidable effects of a proposed Project, doing so is certainly an effective way to meet this requirement. Here, the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project are discussed in Sections 3.1 and Chapter 4.0 (cumulative-level):
• Impact 3.1 -2: General Plan implementation may result in V MT metrics that are greater than the applicable thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable)
• Impact 4.2: Under Cumulative conditions, General Plan implementation may result in VMT metrics that are greater than the applica ble thresholds (13 percent below Baseline conditions) (Significant and Unavoidable and Cumulatively Considerable)

The following analysis of alternatives focuses on significant impacts of the proposed Project , including both those that can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level and those that would remain significant even if mitigation is applied or for which no feasible mitigation is available.

A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was circulated to the public to solicit recommendations for a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. Additionally, a public scoping meeting was held during the public review period to solicit recommendations for a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. No specific alternatives were recommend ed by commenting agencies or the general public during the NOP public review process.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives were established for the proposed Project:
• Update City Policy in the Circulation Element to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743.
• Establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to meet the requirements of State law.
231
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 5.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 5.0-3

• Updates to City Policy and Guidelines should not obstruct and prevent the City from growing in accordance with the City’s existing plans for growth.

5.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THIS EIR
Three alternatives to the proposed Project were developed based on input from City staff, and the technical analysis performed to identify the environmental effects of the proposed Project. The alternatives analyzed in this EIR include the following three alternatives in addition to the proposed Project:
• No Project Alternative
• Policy Change Only Alternative
• TIA Guidelines Only Alternative

NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, and the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guideline s supportive of the Circulation Element. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidance for analyzing VMT.

POLICY CHANGE ONLY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its existing General Plan. This would include policy changes to the Circulation Element intended to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743. Under this alternative, the City would not adopt Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT. In the absence of defined TIA Guidelines, the City would utilize the OPR Guidance for analyzing VMT.

TIA GUIDELINES ONLY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan. There would be no policy changes to the Circulation Element, but the City would adopt Tran sportation Impact Analysis Guidelines defining the methodology for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis. Under this alternative, the City would not be making any policy changes in response to SB 743, but would still be required to analyze projects for VMT.

5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The alternatives analysis provides a summary of the relative impact level of significance associated with each alternative for each of the environmental issue areas analyzed in this EIR. Following the analysis of each alternative, Table 5.0-1 summarizes the comparative effects of each alternative. 232
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

5.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

5.0-4 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Traffic/Circulation
Under this alternative there would be no focused update to the General Plan Circulation Element.

The policies of the existing Circulation Element would remain unchanged, and the new policies proposed to reduce VMT would not be adopted. Additionally, the City would not adopt the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element.

This alternative would not create or reduce any physical environmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical development . However, under this alternative, the City would not be responsive to SB 743, and would not be establishing VMT thresholds , VMT analysis methodologies, and measures intended to reduce VMT withi n the city . Instead, new projects would not have a well-defined method of analysis and mitigation strategy and inconsistent approaches would be common place.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in slightly higher VMT per capita because there would be no requirement for new projects to implement VMT reduction measures. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

POLICY CHANGE ONLY ALTERNATIVE
Traffic/Circulation
This alternative assumes that there would be a focused update to its existing General Plan , but that there would not be a TIA Guidelines supportive of the Circulation Element.

This alternative would not create or reduce any physical environmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical development. Under this alternative, the City would be partially responsive to SB 743, in that they would be establishing policies aimed at reducing VMT within the City. However, there would not b e a well-defined VMT threshold, or VMT analysis methodology. New projects would have some mitigation strategy outlined in the policies, but would not benefit from a well-defined method of analysis and mitigation strategy and inconsistent approaches would be common place.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher. There would also be an inconsistent approach to analysis of VMT. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

TIA GUIDELINES ONLY ALTERNATIVE
Traffic/Circulation
This alternative assumes that there would be no focused update to its existing General Plan , but that there would be a TIA Guidelines defining the methodology for analyzing VMT impacts in Clovis.
233
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 5.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 5.0-5

This alternative would not create or reduce any physical environmental impacts given that it is a policy related alternative and not a physical development. Under this alternative, the City would be partially responsive to SB 743, in that they woul d be establishing a VMT threshold and consistent approach to analyzing and reducing VMT within the City. However, there would not be new polic y direction from the City to reduce VMT. New projects would have some mitigation strategy outlined in the TIA Guid elines, but would not benefit from the direction provided by policy.

Overall, this alternative would be anticipated to result in approximately the same VMT per capita, although it may be slightly higher. There would be an inconsistency between future proj ects in their approach to reducing VMT, because there is no policy directive requiring VMT reduction. This alternative is inferior to the proposed Project.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative be identified among the alternatives that are analyzed in the EIR. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, an EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Secti on 15126.6(e)(2)). The environmentally superior alternative is that alternative with the least adverse environmental impacts when compared to the proposed Project.

As summarized in Table 5.0 -1 below, the Proposed Project is superior to the other Alternati ves.

The proposed Project is considered the environmentally superior alternative because it provides the greatest potential to be consistent with State law (SB 743), and to establish a consistent approach to VMT analysis, and VMT reduction when compared to the other alternatives. The proposed Project establishe s the City’s policy direction related to these topics, while the other alternatives only partial address VMT reduction, or do not address the topic.

TABLE 5.0-1: COMPARISON SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC PROPOSED PROJECT No Project
Alternative
Policy Change Only
Alternative
TIA Guidelines Only
Alternative

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION (TC)
TC Impact 3.1-1 No Impact Slightly greater
impact
Slightly greater
impact
Slightly greater
impact
TC Impact 3.1-2 Significant and
Unavoidable Greater Impact Slightly Greater
Impact
Slightly Greater
Impact
TC Impact 3.1-3 Less than
Significant Equal Impact Equal Impact Equal Impact
Comparison to Proposed
Project Superior Inferior (4th) Inferior (2nd) Inferior (3rd) 234
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

5.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

5.0-6 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.

235
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

REPORT PREPARERS 6.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 6.0-1

CITY OF CLOVIS
Ricky Caperton, AICP .......................................................................................... Deputy City Planner Dave Merchen ................................................................................................................. City Planner Sean Smith, PE .......................................................................................... Supervising Civil Engineer

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP
Steve McMurtry ......................................................................... Principal Planner/Project Manager Elise Carroll ................................................................................................................. Senior Planner Josh Smith ................................................................................................................... Senior Planner William Crenshaw ....................................................................................................... Senior Planner Jennifer De Martino ...................................................................................................... GIS Manager Ziqian Yin ............................................................................................................... Associate Planner

KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES
Mike Aronson, PE. ................................................................................................. Principal Engineer Fernando Sotelo, TE ............................................................................................. Associate Engineer

LOZANO SMITH
Matthew M. Lear ..................................................................................................... Attorney at Law 236
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

6.0 REPORT PREPARERS

6.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.

237
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

REFERENCES 7.0

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update 7.0-1

RE F E RE NC E S
City of Clovis. 2014. General Plan, City of Clovis (Adopted August 25, 2014).

City of Clovis. 2014. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Volume I: Draft PEIR and Appendix A, General Plan and Development Code Update, State Clearinghouse No . 2012061069. (Certified August 25, 2014).

City of Clovis. 2020. Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. 238
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

7.0 REFERENCES

7.0-2 Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

This page left intentionally blank.
239
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

APPENDIX A

Supplemental Draft EIR – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

NO TI CE O F P RE PA R ATI O N
240
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND

INITIAL STUDY

FOR THE
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN

CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
(State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069)

APRIL 4, 2022

Prepared for:

City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2347

Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
(916) 580-9818
D e N o v o P l a n n i n g G r o u p
A L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g , D e s i g n , a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l F i r m 241
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

242
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND

INITIAL STUDY

FOR THE
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN

CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
(State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069)

APRIL 4, 2022

Prepared for:

City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2347

Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
(916) 580-9818

243
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

244
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

NOTICE OF PREPARATION
TO: State Clearinghouse FROM: Ricky Caperton, AICP | Deputy City Planner State Responsible Agencies City of Clovis | Planning Division State Trustee Agencies 1033 Fifth Street
Other Public Agencies Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2347
Interested Organizations [email protected]
SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation – 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update

EIR CONSULTANT
Steve McMurtry, Principal Planner
De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
Phone: (916) 580-9818
An Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project and is attached to this Notice of Preparation (NOP). The Initial Study lists those issues that will require detailed analysis and technical studies that will need to be evaluated and/or prepared as part of the Environmental Impact Report ( EIR). The EIR will consider potential environmental effects of the proposed project to determine the level of significance of the environmental effect, and will analyze these potential effects to the detail necessary to make a determination on the level of significance.

Those environmental issues that have been determined to be less than significant will have a discussion that is limited to a brief explanation of why those effects are not considered potentially significant. In addition, the EIR may also consider those environmental issues which are raised by responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and members of the public or related agencies during the NOP process.

We need to know the views of your agency or organization as to the scope and content of the environmental information germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities or of interest to your organization in connection with the proposed project. S pecifically, we are requesting the following:

1. If you are a public agency, state whether your agency will be a responsible or trustee agency for the proposed project and list the permits or approvals from your agency that will be required for the project and its future actions;

2. Identify significant environmental effects and mitigation measures that you believe need to be explored in the EIR with supporting discussion of why you believe these effects may be significant;
245
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

3. Describe special studies and other information that you believe are necessary for the City to analyze the significant environmental effects, alternatives, and mitigation measures you have identified;

4. For public agencies that provide infrastructure and public services, identify any facilities that must be provided (both on- and off-site) to provide services to the proposed project;

5. Indicate whether a member(s) from your agency would like to attend a scoping workshop/meeting for public agencies to discuss the scope and content of the EIR’s environmental information; and

6. Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the contact person from your agency or organization that we can contact regarding your comments.

Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent and received by the City of Clovis by the following deadlines:
• For responsible agencies, not later than 30 days after you receive this notice. • For all other agencies and organizations, not later than 30 days following the publication of this Notice of Preparation. The 30-day review period begins Monday, April 4, 2022 and ends on Wednesday, May 4, 2022.

If we do not receive a response from your ag ency or organization, we will presume that your agency or organization has no response to make.

A responsible agency, trustee agency, or other public agency may request a meeting with the City or its representatives in accordance with Section 15082(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. A public scoping meeting and neighborhood meeting will be held during the public review period as follows:

Scoping Meeting: A scoping meeting will be held in-person at the City of Clovis Council Chamber, located at 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 on Wednesday, April 27, 2022 from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. If you have any questions, please contact Ricky Caperton, AICP, Deputy City Planner, at [email protected]. If you prefer to attend virtually, you can either enter this link (https://bit.ly/3Do2pwT) into your web browser prior to the start of the meeting or dial in by phone (no video) at 1-844-992-4726 Access Code: 2486 738 6617.

Please send your response to Ricky Caperton, AICP, Deputy City Planner at the City of Clovis | Planning Division, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612. If you have any questions, please contact Ricky Caperton, AICP, Deputy City Planner at 559.324.2347 or via email at:
[email protected].
246
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Initial Study Checklist ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................ ................................ .................... 29 Determination ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 29 Evaluation Instructions ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 30 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ 31 Environmental Checklist ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 32 I. AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................................................................................... 32 II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................................................................................... 33 III. AIR QUALITY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 34 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................... 35 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................................ 37 VI. ENERGY ................................................................................................................................................................................ 38 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS................................................................................................................................................... 39 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 41 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ......................................................................................................... 42 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ..................................................................................................................... 44 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING ........................................................................................................................................ 46 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................................ 47 XIII. NOISE ................................................................................................................................................................................. 48 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING ................................................................................................................................. 49 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES .......................................................................................................................................................... 50 XVI. RECREATION .................................................................................................................................................................. 51 XVII. TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................................................................... 52 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ......................................................................................................................... 53 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................... 54 XX. WILDFIRE ........................................................................................................................................................................... 55 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................. 56 References ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 57

247
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 2

This page left intentionally blank.
248
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 3

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

PROJECT TITLE
2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Element Update (SCH 2012061069)

LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Clovis Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612

CONTACT PERSON
Ricky Caperton, AICP | Deputy City Planner
City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559.324.2347
[email protected]

PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The City of Clovis (City) is in the central portion of Fresno County, approximately 6.5 miles northeast of the City of Fresno downtown area. The City is surrounded by portions of unincorporated Fresno County to the north, east, and south and by the City of Fresno to the west and southwest.

The City, its sphere of influence (SOI), and specific areas beyond the City and its SOI (non -SOI Plan Area) are defined and referred to herein as the Plan Area. At the local level, the Plan Area is generally bounded by Copper Avenue on the north, Willow Avenue on the west, Academy Avenue on the east, and Shields Avenue on the south. State Route 168 (SR-168) bisects the City from the southwest to the northeast.

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CHANGES
Senate Bill (SB) 743, passed in 2013, resulted in several statewide California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) changes. It required the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to establish new metrics for determining the significance o f transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the metrics beyond TPAs. TPA means “an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a transportation improvement program adopted to Section 450.216 or 450.322 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations.”
OPR selected Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the required transportation im pact metric and applied their discretion to require its use statewide for determining potential CEQA impacts related to traffic. This legislation also established that aesthetic and parking effects of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment cen ter projects on an infill site within a TPA are not significant impacts on the environment. The revised CEQA Guidelines that implement this 249
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 4

legislation became effective on December 28, 2018, and state that vehicle Level of Service (LOS) and similar measure s related to delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts for land use projects. As of July 1, 2020, this requirement applied statewide.

The OPR “Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” (December 2018) includes specifications for VMT methodology and recommendations for significance thresholds, screening of project that may be presumed to have less than significant impacts, and mitigation.

OPR’s screening criteria includes the following categories: small projects, projects near transit stations, affordable residential development, redevelopment projects, and local serving retail.

For each category, OPR provides recommended screening analysis methods and metrics to consider. It is noted that the OPR screening criteria is a recommendation by OPR, and is generally used as guidance from OPR in the absence of specific screening criteria established by a local jurisdiction. The proposed Project, includes the City of Clovis developing t heir own specific screening criteria, which has similarities to the OPR recommendations, but is specifically tailored to Clovis.

CITY GUIDELINES AND POLICY CHANGES
Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines
In response to SB 743, the City of Clovis initiated efforts to establish a framework for analyzing transportation impacts that was both consistent with the State’s mandates, and City policy. This effort led to the development of the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (adopted July 20, 2020, Resolution 20 -93), which provides guidance to City staff, applicants, and consultants on the requirements to evaluate transportation impacts for projects in the city for the purpose of determining impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are intended to:
• promote conformance with applicable City and State regulations; • provide evaluation consistent with CEQA;
• ensure consistency in preparation of studies by applicants and consultants; and • provide predictability in content for City staff and the public in reviewing studies.

The guidelines are intended to be comprehensive, however, not all aspects of every transportation analysis can be addressed within this framework and the C ity staff reserves the right to use its judgement to request exemptions and/or to modify requirements for specific projects at the time of the review application.

Project Screening
The Clovis TIA Guidelines provide the following five screening criteria to determine if a project will require a detailed VMT analysis:

1. Small projects

2. Provision of affordable housing

3. Local-serving retail

4. Project located in a High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)

5. Project located in low VMT area
Small Projects
250
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 5

Projects that generate or attract fewer than 500 vehicle trips per day are presumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact. Projects that typically generate 500 vehicle daily trips are shown in Table 2.0-1.

TABLE 2.0-1: SAMPLE SMALL PROJECTS (LESS THAN 500 DAILY TRIPS)

LAND USE TYPE NUMBER OF UNITS/ SQUARE FEET
Single Family Residential 53 Dwelling Units
Townhome/Attached Residential 68 Dwelling Units
Retail 13,250 SF
Light Industrial 100,800 SF
NOTE: CALCULATED TRIP RATES FROM THE ITE TRIP GENERATION MANUAL, 10TH EDITION.

Affordable Housing
Affordable housing is designated as housing for sale or for rent below market rate. R esidential projects in high quality transit areas with a high proportion of affordable housing are presumed to have a l ess-than-significant transportation impact . Projects can only be screened out if they are located in an area supported by a quality walking and biking network with nearby retail and employment opportunities. If a project contains less than 100 percent affo rdable housing, the portion that is affordable should be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis.

Local-Serving Retail and Public Facilities
Projects that are local -serving retail with 100,000 square feet gross floor area or less are presumed to have a less-than-significant impact. This applies to the entirety of a retail project; for a mixed -use project, this screening criteria should be applied to the retail/commercial component separately to determine if that portion of the project screens out of a de tailed VMT analysis.

The determination of local -serving retail is based on location, the characteristics of the project and the vicinity of the site, as well as the envisioned good s and services the retail development would provide. Generally, local -serving retail primarily provides goods and services that most people need on a regular basis and be located close to where people live. Groceries, medicines, fast food and casual restaurants, fitness and beauty services are typical goods and services provided by local-serving retail centers.

The City may require that a project applicant provide a market analysis to demonstrate that the project meets the characteristics of a local-serving retail development based on the goods and services provided relative to the geographic location, the customer base, and other nearby retail uses.

Public services (e.g., police, fire stations, public utilities, neighborhood parks 1) do not generally generate substantial amounts of trips and VMT. Instead, these land uses are often built to support other nearby land uses (e.g., office and residential). Therefore, these land uses can be presumed to have less-than-significant impacts on VMT. However, this presumption would not apply if the

1 For the purpose of conducting VMT analyses, neighborhood parks are defined as typically including playground equipment, playfields, and picnic facilities; ranging in size of up to 30 acres; and serving as social and recreational focal points for neighborhoods.
251
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 6

project is sited in a location that requires e mployees or visitors to travel substantial distances and may require a detailed VMT analysis.

High-Quality Transit Area (HQTA)
Projects that are located in a high-quality transit area would not require a detailed VMT analysis.

However, this presumption does not apply if the project:
• has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• includes substantially more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City (per Section 9.32.040 of the Municipal Code) such that it discourages use of alternative modes (transit, biking, walking) by promoting auto ownership and making driving very convenient;
• is inconsistent with the applicable Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as determined by the City; or • replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units.

A map of t he existing High-Quality Transit Areas in the city is provided in Attachment A of the TIA Guidelines.

Project Located in Low VMT Areas
Residential and employment projects that are proposed in areas that generate VMT below adopted City thresholds are presumed to have a less -than-significant VMT impact and thus can be screened out. The City provides screening maps based on transportation analysis zones (TAZs) and results from the Fresno COG travel model. The following types of proje cts may be screened out of detailed VMT analysis using these criteria:
• Residential projects proposed in TAZs with total daily resident-based VMT per capita that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County • Office or the employment portions of other non-residential uses with total daily employee-based VMT per employee that is 13 percent less than the existing average baseline level for Fresno County
The TAZs that fall into these categories are shown in green in the maps provi ded in Attachment B of the TIA Guidelines.

Consistency with RTP/SCS
If a proposed project is inconsistent with the adopted Fresno COG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/ SCS), the City will evaluate whether that inconsistency may result in a significant impact on transportation. Therefore, projects that are inconsistent with the RTP/SCS would not qualify for screening out of a detailed VMT analysis.

Circulation Element Update
The Clovis City Council adopted the Clovis Genera l Plan on August 25, 2014. Included in the General Plan is the Circulation Element, which determines the transportation system necessary to accommodate the planned land use and development. The Circulation Element identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major transportation facilities, including major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and 252
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 7

facilities. The goals and policies in this element are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and are intended to provide a balance between the City’s future growth and land use development, roadway size, traffic service levels, and community character.

As the City of Clovis developed the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines in response to the requirements of SB 743, it became evident that the City’s Circulation Element needed to be updated to be in alignment with the State’s mandates, and the Interim Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. City staff then embarked on an update to the Circulation Element, which focuses on policy language additions that are aimed at reducing VMT by way of a variety of planning mechanisms.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives were established for the Proposed Project:
• Update City Policy in the Circulation Element to meet the mandates of State law related to conformance with SB 743.
• Establish Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to meet the requirements of State law.
• Updates to City Policy and Guidelines should not obstruct and prevent the City from growing in accordance with the City’s existing plans for growth.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

FOCUSED UPDATE
The City of Clovis is preparing a focused update to its existing General Plan. The proposed Project concentrates on policy changes to the Circulation Element only, and does not change any other Element of the General Plan. The proposed Project also includes adoption of the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, which are supportive of the Circulation Element.

The focused General Plan Update does not affect land uses or development patterns, and does not result in any physical development. The key components of the focused General Plan Update include revisions to the goals and policies in the Circulation Element. The following presents the proposed changes in a track change form.

GOALS AND POLICIES
OVERARCHING GOAL: A comprehensive and well-maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, as well as encourages reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through well -planned pedestrian connections and improved connectivity.

Goal 1: A context -sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs.

Policy 1.1 Multimodal network. The city shall plan, design, operate, and maintain the transportation network to promote safe and convenient travel for all users:
pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, freight, and motorists. 253
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 8

Policy 1.2 Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance the comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Policy 1.3 Age and mobility. The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Policy 1.4 Jobs and housing. Encourage infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing, and vice versa, to reduce citywide vehicle miles traveled and effectively utilize the existing transportation infras tructure, as well as promote carpooling whenever possible.

Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood -serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).

Policy 1.6 Internal circulation. New development shall utilize a grid or modified -grid street pattern. Areas designated for residential and mixed -use village developments should feature short block lengths of 200 to 600 feet.

Policy 1.7 Narrow streets. The City may permit curb -to-curb dimensions that are narrower than current standards on local streets to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and enhance safety.

Policy 1.8 Network completion. New development shall complete the extension of stub streets planned to connect to adjacent streets, where appropriate.

Goal 2: A roadway network that is well planned, funded, and maintained.

Policy 2.1 Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:

A. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours B. Allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
i. Preserving agriculture or open space land
ii. Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood iii. Preserving or creating a pedestrian-friendly environment in Old Town or mixed- use village districts
iv. Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders v. Where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible Policy 2.2 Multimodal LOS. Monitor the evolution of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) standards. The city may adopt MMLOS standards when appropriate.

Policy 2.3 Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.

Policy 2.4 Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right -of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation. The City shall request the County of Fresno to apply the same requirements in the Clovis planning area.
254
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 9

Policy 2.5 Regional and state roadway funding. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to fund roadway improvements adjacent to and within the City’s Planning Area.

Policy 2.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Development projects shall comply with the City’s VMT Transportation Analysis Guidelines and provide the appropriate VMT mitigation measures as determined through the analysis.

Policy 2.7 VMT Mitigation Fee Program. Evaluate the feasibility of a VMT mitigation fee program and explore opportunities for establishing an in-lieu mitigation fee to offset VMT impacts from development.

Policy 2.8 Partner with local agencies and stakeholders. Partner with other local and regional agencies and stakeholders to explore VMT mitigation measures at the regional scale.

Goal 3: A multimodal transportation network that is safe and comfortable in the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1 Traffic calming. Employ traffic-calming measures in new de velopments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.

Policy 3.2 Neighborhood compatibility. Periodically review and update design standards to ensure that new and redesigned streets are compatible with the context of adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3 Old Town and mixed use village centers. Transportation decisions on local streets in Old Town and mixed-use village centers shall prioritize pedestrians, then bicyclists, then mass transit, then motorists.

Policy 3.4 Road diets . Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.

Policy 3.5 Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or intersection expansions after considering multimodal alternat ive improvements to non -automotive facilities.

Policy 3.6 Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.

Policy 3.7 Conflict points. Minimize th e number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.

Policy 3.8 Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.

Policy 3.9 Park-once. Encourage “park -once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well-marked access to sidewalks and businesses.
255
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 10

Policy 3.10 Pedestrian access and circulation. Entrances at signalized intersections should provide sidewalks on both sides of the entrance that connect to an internal pedestrian pathway to businesses and throughout nonresidential parking lots larger than 50 spaces.

Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and r ight-of- ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non-motorized transportation.

Policy 3.12 Residential orientation. Where feasible, residential development should face local and collector streets to increase visibility and safety of travelers along the streets, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access.

Goal 4: A well-planned and maintained pedestrian circulation network that promotes increased use of the City’s bicycle, transit, and pedestrian facilities in order to reduce commuting by single-occupancy vehicles whenever possible .

Policy 4.1 Bike and transit backbone. The bicycle and transit system should connect Shaw Avenue, Old Town, the Medical Center/R&T Park, and the three Urban Centers.

Policy 4.2 Priority for new bicycle facilities. Prioritize investments in the backbone system over other bicycle improvements.

Policy 4.3 Freeway crossings. Require separate bicycle and pedestrian crossings for new freeway extensions and encourage separate crossings where Class I facilities are planned to cross existing freeways.

Policy 4.4 Bicycles and transit. Coordinate with transit agencies to integrate bicycle access and storage into transit vehicles, bus stops, and activity centers.

Policy 4.5 Transit stops. Improve and mai ntain safe, clean, comfortable, well -lit, and rider-friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy 4.6 Transit priority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.

Policy 4.7 Bus rapid transit. Plan for bus rapid transit and transit -only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase.

Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents focusing on connectivity between adjacent neighborhoods, parks, trails, and goods and services.

Policy 5.1 Complete street amenities. Upgrade existing streets and design new streets to include complete street amenities, prioritizing improvements to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety, consistent with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan and other master plans.

Policy 5.2 Development-funded facilities. Require development to fund and construct facilities as shown in the Active Transportation Plan when facilities are i n or adjacent to the development.
256
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 11

Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.

Policy 5.4 Homeowner associations. The city may require homeowner associations to maintain pa thways and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the homeowner association area.

Policy 5.5 Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity centers and to provide general pedestrian connectivity throughout the city.

Goal 6: Safe and efficient goods movement with minimal impacts on local roads and neighborhoods.

Policy 6.1 Truck routes. Plan and designate truck routes that minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Policy 6.2 Land use. Place industrial and warehousing businesses near freeways and truck routes to minimize truck traffic through or near residential areas.

Goal 7: A regional transportation system that connects Clovis to the San Joaquin Valley region.

Policy 7.1 Clovis Avenue extension. Invest in the extension of Clovis Avenue north to Copper Avenue as funding is available.

Policy 7.2 Right-of-way for future e xtensions. Coordinate with Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments, and Caltrans to preserve future right -of-way for extending Clovis Avenue north of Copper Avenue to Auberry Road and future State Route 65.

Policy 7.3 San Joaquin River crossing. Collaborate with the Fresno Council of Governments and appropriate agencies to secure a San Joaquin River crossing between State Route 41 and North Fork Road.

Goal 8: Improve and enhance the circulation network in a manner that reduces VMT through improved connectivity by focusing on modes of transportation that promotes the reduction in the use of single-occupancy vehicles whenever feasible.

Policy 8.1 Transportation Demand Management. Develop Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that p romote, enhance, and make available feasible alternative modes of transportation to residents, employees, and visitors.

Policy 8.2 Transit Routes. As development occurs in the City’s growth areas, continue to evaluate transit routes to determine the most efficient methods of transporting people between residential neighborhoods and goods and services.

Policy 8.3 Bicycle Lanes. Partner with any local bicycle advocacy groups to improve the design, location, and functionality of bicycle lanes to encourage sa fe and efficient travel lanes.
257
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 12

Policy 8.4 Connectivity between residential and commercial. Continue to explore opportunities for increased non -vehicular connectivity between new and existing residential development and commercial uses.

Policy 8.5 Community outreach and education. Explore the feasibility of a community outreach and education program that promotes and highlights opportunities for safe and efficient non -vehicular modes of transportation for commuting and recreation.

Policy 8.6 Employer commut e programs. Work with businesses to encourage commuter programs and infrastructure that promotes alternative modes of transportation reducing the use of single -occupancy vehicles, such as additional bicycle racks/lockers, on -site shower facilities, and per ks for employees who commute.

REQUESTED ENTITLEMENTS AND OTHER APPROVALS
This analysis may be used for the following direct and indirect approvals and permits associated with adoption and implementation of the proposed Project.

CITY OF CLOVIS
The City of Clovis is the lead agency for the proposed Project. The proposed focused General Plan Update will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the City Council for comment, review, and consideration for adoption. The City Co uncil has the sole discretionary authority to approve and adopt the proposed focused General Plan Update. In order to approve the proposed Project, the City Council would consider the following actions:
• Certification of the General Plan Supplemental EIR;
• Adoption of required CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the above action;
• Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and • Approval of the focused General Plan Update.

This analysis provides a review of environmenta l effects associated with implementation of the proposed focused General Plan Update, which amends the adopted Clovis General Plan. When considering approval of subsequent activities under the Clovis General Plan, the focused changes to the Circulation Ele ment must be considered. As such, the City of Clovis would utilize this Supplemental EIR, in addition to the existing certified General Plan EIR, as the basis in determining potential environmental effects and the appropriate level of environmental review, if any, of a subsequent activity. Projects or activities successive to this Supplemental EIR, would be proposed under the adopted General Plan and may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Approval and funding of major projects and capital improvements; • Future Specific Plan, Planned Unit Development, or Master Plan approvals; • Annexations;
• Revisions to the Clovis Zoning Ordinance;
• Development plan approvals, such as tentative subdivision maps, variances, conditional use permits, and other land use permits;
258
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 13

• Development Agreements;
• Property rezoning consistent with the General Plan;
• Permit issuances and other approvals necessary for public and private development projects; and
• Issuance of permits and other approvals necessary for implementation of the General Plan.

City approval of the proposed Project would not require any actions or approvals by other public agencies. However, because of the long -range planning nature of the proposed Project, the City would need to coordinate wit h other long range planning efforts by other agency that operate regionally. These include, but are not necessarily limited to:
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) coordination regarding regional transportation planning efforts.
• Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) coordination regarding regional transportation planning efforts.

259
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 14

This page left intentionally blank.

260
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 1
Clovis Planning Area
LEGEND
261
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 16

This page left intentionally blank.

262
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Herndon Ave
Mc Call Ave
Sierra Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Bullard Ave
UV168
Alluvial Ave

FRIANT-KERN CANAL
Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
StateHwy168
AG: Agriculture (1 DU/20 Ac)
RR: Rural Residential
VL: Very Low Density Residential
(0.6-2.0 DU/Ac)
L: Low Density Residential
(2.1-4.0 DU/Ac)
M: Medium Density Residential
(4.1-7.0 DU/Ac)
MH: Medium High Density Residential
(7.1-15.0 DU/Ac)
H: High Density Residential
(15.1-25.0 DU/Ac)
VH: Very High Density Residential
(25.1-43.0 DU/Ac)
MU-V: Mixed Use Village
MU-BC: Mixed Use Business Campus
O: Office
I: Industrial
NC: Neighborhood Commercial
GC: General Commercial
OS: Open Space
P: Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
PK: Park
S: School
W: Water
C-SP: Special Commercial
PRC-FC: Planned Rural Community
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 2
Land Use Diagram
LEGEND
Clovis City Limits
263
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 18

This page left intentionally blank.

264
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
Loma Vista
Heritage
Grove
Northeast
Urban Center
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Urban Centers
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 3
Urban Centers
LEGEND
265
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 20

This page left intentionally blank.

266
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
1212
11 55
22 44
99 141477
33 66
1111
88 1313
1010
SP-1
SP-2
SP-4
SP-3
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sourc
e: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles

CITY OF CLOVIS
LEGEND
Specific Plan Areas
Focus Areas
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
Figure 4
Focus Area
267
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 22

This page left intentionally blank.

268
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles
Freeway
Conceptual State Highway
State Highway
Expressway
Arterial
Rural County Arterial
Collector
Rural County Collector
Local
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
Emergency Access Only

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 5
Circulation Diagram
LEGEND
269
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 24

This page left intentionally blank.

270
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles
Class I - Multipurpose Trail
Class II - Bike Lane
Class III - Bike Route
Class II or III - Bikeway
City of Fresno - Existing & Proposed Trail
System
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary
City Parks

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 6
Bicycle and Trails System
LEGEND
Clovis Landfill 13-Miles
North of City Boundary
Backbone Bicycle System
271
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 26

This page left intentionally blank.

272
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Shepherd Ave
Barstow Ave
Copper Ave
Fowler Ave
Peach Ave
Ashlan Ave
Sunnyside Ave
Nees Ave
Locan Ave
Armstrong Ave
Shaw Ave
Clovis Ave
Dakota Ave
Bullard Ave
Alluvial Ave
Sierra Ave
Tollhouse Rd
Perrin Ave
Mc Call Ave
Gettysburg Ave
Harlan Ranch Blvd
Villa Ave
Herndon Ave
Temperance Ave
Teague Ave
Minnewawa Ave
Fifth St
De Wolf AveLeonard Ave
Highland Ave
Behymer Ave
Willow Ave
International Ave
Temperance Ave
Thompson Ave
168
168
Friant-Kern Canal
Friant-KernCanal
Clovis Landfill (13 Miles North of City)
Sour
ce: City of Clovis. Map date: March 23, 2022.

O
0 1½
Miles
Clovis Stageline Route
Clovis City Limits
Clovis Sphere of Influence
Planning Area Boundary

CITY OF CLOVIS
Figure 7
Transit System
LEGEND
FAX Routes
Clovis Landfill 13-Miles
North of City Boundary
Transit Priority Corridors
273
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 28

This page left intentionally blank.
274
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 29

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
None of the environmental factors listed below would have potentially significant impacts as a result of development of this project, as described on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gasses Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population and Housing Public Services
Recreation X Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service
Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

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

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

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

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

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

Signature

Date
275
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 30

EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS
1) 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 st andards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) 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.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significan t, 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 t he determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "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 S ignificant 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 Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) 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 an 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.
6) 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. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 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 significant. 276
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 31

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
In each area of potential impact listed in this section, there are one or more questions which assess the degree of potential environmental effect. A response is provided to each question using one of the four impact evaluation criteria described below. A discussion of the response is also included.
• Potentially Significant Impact. This response is appropriate when there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries, upon completion of the Initial Study, an EIR is required. • Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. This response applies when 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.
• Less than Significant Impact. A less than significant impact is one which is deemed to have little or no adverse effect on the environment. Mitigation measures are, therefore, not necessary, although they may be recommended to further reduce a minor impact. • No Impact. These issues were either identified as having no impact on the environment, or they are not relevant to the project.

277
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 32

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This section of the Initial Study incorporates the most current Appendix "G" Environmental Checklist Form contained in the CEQA Guidelines. Impact questions and responses are included in both tabular and narrative formats for each of the 21 environmental topic areas.

I. AESTHETICS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
X
c) In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
X
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-d): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not hav e been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic . Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. 278
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 33

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricult ural 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 1222(g)) or timberland (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 4526)?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? X
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-e): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update C ity policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.

279
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 34

III. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? 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?
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-d): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 1516 2 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy i n the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s poli cy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when c ompared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. 280
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 35

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 Fis h
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 state or
federally protected wetlands (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
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-d): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not hav e been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in th e certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the Ci ty’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified 281
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 36

EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.

282
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 37

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section15064.5?
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-c): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysi s must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet st ate law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects, which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circ ulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.

283
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 38

VI. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-c): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would re sult in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. 284
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 39

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

X
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 direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-c): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysi s must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet st ate law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a 285
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 40

topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further environmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CEQA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in the supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic.

286
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.
2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE INITIAL STUDY

PAGE 41

VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 gasses?
X
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-c): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) purs uant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update City policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 provides that the focus of a supplemental analysis on new information can be narrowly on new effects , which had not been considered before, and that if there are no effects on a topic beyond those disclosed in the certified EIR, no further enviro nmental review of that topic would be required.

The City’s policy changes will narrowly affect circulation and transportation topics, but will not have a direct or indirect effect on this this CEQA topic. Instead, the City’s policy changes would result in no anticipated environmental changes to this CE QA topic when compared to the environmental effects discussed under the certified EIR. As such, this CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR pursuant to applicable legal standards, and does not warrant further environmental review in t he supplemental analysis. The proposed project would have No Impact relative to this topic. 287
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

INITIAL STUDY 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE

PAGE 42

IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
X
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
Responses to Checklist Questions
Responses a-c): This CEQA topic has been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR for the General Plan and Development Code Update ( State Clearinghouse No. 2012061069 ) pursuant to applicable legal standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that a supplemental analysis must be prepared for a project if there is new information of substantial importance that was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified. The City’s desire to update C ity policy in the Circulation Element to meet state law related to SB 743 qualifies as new information of substantial importance not known at the time the previous EIR was certified.