Agenda packet — Clovis City Council, March 18, 2024 (part 3 of 15)

TOC [TYPE THE DOCUMENT TITLE]
TOC-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Table 4.0-1: Growth Projections................................................................................................4.0-2 Table 4.0-2: Project Water Demand for Buildout of the Proposed Project.............................4.0-22 Table 4.0-3: Summary of Potable and Raw Water Demand Versus Supply During Hydrologic Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years ..................................................4.0-23 Table 5.0-1: Comparison of Alternative Project Impacts to the Proposed Project .................5.0-73 Figures
Note: Figures are located at the end of the chapters.

Figure 2.0-1 Regional Location Map
Figure 2.0-2 Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2.0-3 Annexation Map
Figure 2.0-4 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 2.0-5 Assessor Parcel Map
Figure 2.0-6 Aerial Photo of Project Site
Figure 2.0-7 City of Clovis General Plan Land Uses
Figure 2.0-8 Fresno County General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations Figure 2.0-9 Proposed General Plan Land Uses
Figure 2.0-10 Proposed Zoning
Figure 2.0-11a Tentative Subdivision Map North
Figure 2.0-11b Tentative Subdivision Map Southwest
Figure 2.0-11c Tentative Subdivision Map Southeast
Figure 3.2-1 Important Farmlands Map
Figure 3.2-2 Soils Map
Figure 3.2-3 Williamson Act Map
Figure 3.4-1 Land Cover Types
Figure 3.4-2 California Natural Diversity Database 9-Quad Search Figure 3.6-1 Earthquake Faults Map
Figure 3.8-1 Site Observations Map
Figure 3.9-1 Watersheds
Figure 3.9-2 FEMA Floodplain
Figure 3.9-3 Dam Inundation
Figure 3.13-1 City of Clovis Roadway Classifications
Figure 3.13-2 City of Clovis Existing Bicycle Facilities Figure 3.13-3 City of Clovis Proposed Bicycle Facilities Figure 3.13-4 City of Clovis Existing Sidewalk Facilities Figure 3.13-5 Project Trip Distribution
Figure 3.13-6 Project Trip Assignment
Figure 3.13-7 Existing Plus Project with Improvements Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control 282
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
[TYPE THE DOCUMENT TITLE] TOC
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North TOC-7 Appendices
Appendix A: Notice of Preparation, and NOP Comments
Appendix B: Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model Appendix C: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Appendices Appendix D: Biological Documentation
Appendix E: Cultural Investigation and Tribal Consultation Documentation Appendix F: Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix G: Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H: Environmental Noise Assessment
Appendix I: Transportation Analysis
Appendix J: Water Supply Assessment
Appendix K: Water Infrastructure Investigation
283
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

TOC [TYPE THE DOCUMENT TITLE]
TOC-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
284
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North ES-1

INTRODUCTION
The City of Clovis, as the lead agency, determined that the proposed Shepherd North Project is a "project" within the definition of CEQA. CEQA requires the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approving any project, which may have a significant impact on the environment.

For the purposes of CEQA, the term "project" refers to the whole 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]).

The EIR contains a description of the Project, description of the environmental setting, identification of Project impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, as well as an analysis of Project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growthinducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. This EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. Comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) were considered in preparing the analysis in this EIR.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Shepherd North Project (Project) site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line at the northeast corner of North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue. The Project site is bounded on the north by Perrin Road, on the east by North Fowler Avenue, on the south by East Shepherd Avenue, and on the west by North Sunnyside Avenue. Figures 2.0-1 and 2.0-2 show the proposed Project’s regional location and vicinity. The Project site is in the southwest quadrant of Section 21, Township 12 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM).

The proposed Project will provide a variety of housing types and lot sizes that will accommodate a range of housing objectives and buyer needs with a goal to ensure housing for a variety of families and lifestyles. The Development Area will accommodate up to 605 residential units. Specifically, the northern portion of the Development Area is planned to include the development of up to 101 single-family residences with lot sizes ranging from approximately 5,400 square feet to 15,900 square feet. The southern portion of the Development Area is planned for smaller lot single-family residences, with lot sizes ranging from approximately 1,980 to 3,800 square feet, and with larger corner lots that are approximately 4,200 to 7,500 square feet.

The proposed Project includes open space totaling approximately 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks. The main park would be located within the central portion of the Development Area, which would connect to a network of promenades and trails located within and along the perimeter of a portion of the Development Area. The promenade and trail network would also link to adjacent trails located in the planned residential community to the west, as well as the trail at Dog Creek and Old Town Clovis to the south.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Project Area – Includes the whole of the Project site (approximately 155 acres), encompassing the approximate 77-acre Development Area and the approximate 78-acre Non-Development Area.1

o Development Area - Includes the parcels being annexed that will be entitled for subdivision and development. This will include a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Pre-zone, Annexation/Reorganization, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, and Residential Site Plan Review.
o Non-Development Area - Includes the parcels being included in the SOI expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development. This includes two separate areas, each described as an Expansion SubArea. The two Expansion SubAreas total 78 acres and are defined as Expansion SubArea North and Expansion SubArea East.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
This Draft EIR addresses environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project that are known to the City of Clovis, were raised during the NOP process, or raised during preparation of the Draft EIR. This Draft EIR discusses impacts associated with aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas and climate resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, population and housing, noise, public services and recreation, transportation and circulation, and utilities and service systems.

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:
• Agricultural: conversion of farmland, impacts to adjacent farmland; • Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Energy: construction emissions, operations emissions, health risks, ambient air quality, emissions reduction, vegetation barriers/urban greening, clean lawn/garden equipment, District rules/regulations, • Biological: Swainson’s hawk and other raptors;
• Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Use or storage of hazardous materials and wastes, underground petroleum storage tanks, protection of groundwater, proper destruction of wells and septic tanks, appropriate construction equipment operations and maintenance, • Hydrology/Water Supply Concerns: well water recharge/groundwater, irrigation, water supply; non-potable water supply, flood control/drainage, impervious surfaces, storm drainage easements;
• Land Use and Planning: Affordable housing;
• Noise: Compliance with the Noise Element, elevated noise levels; 1 It should be noted that the term ‘Project Area’ is used interchangeably with ‘Project Site’, throughout this EIR.
286
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North ES-3 • Traffic: Need for a traffic study, additional traffic, need for street improvements, need for improvements on internal roads and access to Fowler/Behymer; vehicle miles traveled, intersections Herndon Avenue/Fowler, and SR168/Shepherd Avenue, multimodal transportation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, public transportation, connectivity between residential and commercial/retail uses, feasible mitigation, EV charging; • Utilities: Costs of utility expansion, cumulative impacts.

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 could feasibly accomplish the basic objectives of the proposed Project. 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 (No Build) Alternative: Under this alternative, development of the Project site would not occur, and the Project site would remain in its current existing condition. • Increased Density Mixed Use Alternative: Under this alternative, the proposed Project would be developed at a higher density for the residential uses, and would also include a mixed-use component to the alternative. Approximately 62 acres would be developed with 605 residential units under the medium high density residential use, 10 acres would be developed with 195 apartments under the high density residential use, and 5 acres would be developed with 108,000 square feet under the neighborhood commercial use. • Reduced Density Alternative: Under this alternative, the proposed Project would have a reduced density for the residential uses. Approximately 150 residential units would be developed under the very low-density residential designation. • Reduced Sphere of Influence Alternative: Physically, there is little difference between the proposed Project and this alternative. It is noted, however, that the reduction in the SOI would eliminate the possibility of the Non-Development Area connecting to City services at some point in the future, if desired by those residents.

Alternatives are described in detail in Chapter 5. Table ES-1 provides a comparison of the alternatives using a qualitative matrix that compares each alternative relative to the other Project alternatives.

TABLE ES-1: COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE PROJECT IMPACTS TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUE

NO PROJECT
(NO BUILD)

ALTERNATIVE

INCREASED DENSITY

MIXED USE

ALTERNATIVE

REDUCED DENSITY

ALTERNATIVE

REDUCED SPHERE

OF INFLUENCE

ALTERNATIVE
Aesthetics and Visual
Resources Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Agricultural
Resources Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Air Quality Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Biological Resources Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) 287
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUE

NO PROJECT
(NO BUILD)

ALTERNATIVE

INCREASED DENSITY

MIXED USE

ALTERNATIVE

REDUCED DENSITY

ALTERNATIVE

REDUCED SPHERE

OF INFLUENCE

ALTERNATIVE
Cultural and Tribal
Resources Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Geology and Soils Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Greenhouse Gases,
Climate Change and
Energy
Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Hazards and
Hazardous Materials Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Hydrology and Water
Quality Less (Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (2nd Best) Land Use, Population,
and Housing Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Noise Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Public Services and
Recreation Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Transportation and
Circulation Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Equal (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) Utilities Less (Best) Greater (4th Best) Less (2nd Best) Equal (3rd Best) GREATER = GREATER IMPACT THAN THAT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT LESS = LESS IMPACT THAN THAT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
EQUAL = NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN IMPACT FROM THAT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT As Table ES-1 presents a comparison of the alternative Project impacts with those of the proposed Project. As shown in the table, the No Project (No Build) Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. However, as required by CEQA, when the No Project (No Build) Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the environmentally superior alternative among the others must be identified. Therefore, the Reduced Density Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative because all environmental issues would have reduced impacts compared to the proposed Project. It is noted that the Reduced Density Alternative does not fully meet all of the Project objectives.

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, this EIR focuses on the 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 regulations.

The environmental impacts of the proposed Project, the impact level of significance prior to mitigation, the proposed mitigation measures and/or adopted policies and standard measures that are already in place to mitigate an impact, and the impact level of significance after mitigation are summarized in Table ES-2.
288
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North ES-5 TABLE ES-2: PROJECT IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.1-1: Project implementation may result
in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas and
resources or substantial degradation of visual
character.

LS None required. LS
Impact 3.1-2: Project implementation may
substantially damage scenic resources within a
State Scenic Highway.

LS None required. LS
Impact 3.1-3: Project implementation may result
in light and glare impacts.

LS Conditions of Approval will require compliance with the Development Standards for lighting, landscaping, and building design, which would collectively minimize the visual impacts to the greatest extent feasible as the site transitions from agricultural to urban/suburban uses.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.2-1: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in the conversion of Farmlands,
including Prime Farmland and Farmland of
Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural uses.

LS None required. LS
Impact 3.2-2: The proposed Project has the
potential to conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or Williamson Act Contracts.

LS
None required. LS
Impact 3.2-3: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in conflicts with adjacent
agricultural lands or indirectly cause conversion
of agricultural lands.

LS None required LS

AIR QUALITY
(This project will comply with all existing regulations, rules, standards, and specifications that are already in place, including from SJVAPCD, CARB, etc.) 289
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.3-1: Project operation would result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in
non-attainment, or conflict or obstruct
implementation of the District’s air quality plan.

LS Conditions of Approval will require compliance with the APCD Rules and regulations, which would collectively minimize the air quality impacts from construction and operation to the greatest extent feasible as the site transitions from agricultural to urban/suburban uses.

LS
Impact 3.3-2: Proposed Project construction
activities would not result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the Project region is in non-attainment,
or conflict or obstruct implementation of the
District’s air quality plan.

LS
Impact 3.3-3: The proposed Project would not
generate carbon monoxide hotspot impacts.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.3-4: The proposed Project has the
potential for public exposure to toxic air
contaminants.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.3-5: The proposed Project would not
cause exposure to other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people.

LS None required. --
290
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.4-1: The proposed Project has the
potential to have a direct or indirect effect on
special-status invertebrate species.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.4-2: The proposed Project has the
potential to have direct or indirect effects on
special-status reptile and amphibian species.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.4-3: The proposed Project has the
potential to have direct or indirect effects on
special-status bird species.

PS Mitigation Measure 3.4-1: The Project applicant shall implement the following measure to avoid or minimize impacts on other protected bird species that may occur on the site:
• Preconstruction surveys for active nests of special-status birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in all areas of suitable habitat within 500 feet of project disturbance. Surveys shall be conducted within 14 days before commencement of any construction activities that occur during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31) in a given area.
• If any active nests, or behaviors indicating that active nests are present, are observed, appropriate buffers around the nest sites shall be determined by a qualified biologist to avoid nest failure resulting from project activities. The size of the buffer shall depend on the species, nest location, nest stage, and specific construction activities to be performed while the nest is active. The buffers may be adjusted if a qualified biologist determines, based on these same considerations, that a change in buffer size would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. If buffers are adjusted, monitoring will be conducted to confirm that project activity is not resulting in detectable adverse effects on nesting birds or their young. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the nest site is otherwise no longer in use.

LS
291
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.4-4: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in direct or indirect effects on
special-status mammal species.

PS Mitigation Measure 3.4-2: Prior to grading of each Project Development phase, the Project applicant shall conduct a survey of the area to be graded for bat roosts, and if present, the Project applicant shall implement the following measures to avoid or minimize impacts on special-status bats:
• If removal of suitable roosting areas (i.e., buildings, trees, shrubs, bridges, etc.) must occur during the bat pupping season (April 1 through July 31), surveys for active maternity roosts shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The surveys shall be conducted from dusk until dark.
• If a special-status bat maternity roost is located, appropriate buffers around the roost sites shall be determined by a qualified biologist and implemented to avoid destruction or abandonment of the roost resulting from habitat removal or other project activities. The size of the buffer shall depend on the species, roost location, and specific construction activities to be performed in the vicinity. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until the end of the pupping season (August 1) or until a qualified biologist conforms the maternity roost is no longer active.
• If a non-maternal roost is located, eviction and exclusion techniques shall be conducted as recommended by the qualified biologist. Methods may include opening the roosting area to change the air flow and lighting, installing one-way doors, or other appropriate methods that allow the bats to exit and find a new roost. After eviction is believed to be completed, acoustic monitoring, and an evening emergence survey shall be performed by the qualified biologist to ensure eviction is complete. For tree removal, a two-step tree removal process involving removal of all branches that do not provide roosting habitat on the first day, and then the next day cutting down the remaining portion of the tree.

LS
Impact 3.4-5: The proposed Project has the
potential for direct or indirect effects on
candidate, sensitive, or special-status plant
species.

LS None required. --
292
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.4-6: The proposed Project has the
potential to effect protected wetlands and
jurisdictional waters.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.4-7: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in adverse effects on riparian
habitat or a sensitive natural community.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.4-8: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in interference with the
movement of native fish or wildlife species or
with established wildlife corridors or impede the
use of native wildlife nursery sites.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.4-9: The proposed Project has the
potential to conflict with an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan.

LS None required --
Impact 3.4-10: The proposed Project has the
potential to conflict with local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such
as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

LS None required. --

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.5-1: Project implementation has the
potential to cause a substantial adverse change to
a significant historical or archaeological resource,
as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5
LS Mitigation Measure 3.5-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural, historical, archaeological, tribal, and/or human in origin are discovered during construction and/or ground disturbance, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. A Native American Representative from traditionally and culturally affiliated Native American Tribes that requested consultation shall be immediately contacted and invited to assess the significance of the find and make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment, as necessary. If deemed necessary by the City, a qualified cultural resources specialist meeting the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology, may also assess the significance of the find in joint consultation with Native American Representatives to ensure that Tribal values are considered. Work at the discovery location cannot resume until it is determined by the City, in consultation with culturally affiliated tribes, that the find is not a tribal cultural resource, or that the find is a tribal cultural resource and all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the LS
293
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
requirements of the CEQA, including AB 52, has been satisfied. The qualified cultural resources specialist shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgement.

The following notifications and measures shall apply to potential unique archaeological resources and potential historical resources of an archaeological nature (as opposed to tribal cultural resources), depending on the nature of the find:
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource that might qualify as a unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource that might qualify as a unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the City and applicable landowner. The professional archaeologist and a representative from the City shall consult to determine whether any unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature are present, in part based on a finding of eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. If it is determined that unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature are present, the qualified archaeologist shall develop mitigation or treatment measures for consideration and approval by the City. Mitigation shall be developed and implemented in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 and Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, with a preference for preservation in place. Consistent with Section 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place may be accomplished through planning construction to avoid the resource; incorporating the resource within open space; capping and covering the resource; or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. If approved by the City, such measures shall be implemented and completed prior to commencing further work for which grading or building permits were issued, unless otherwise directed by the City. Avoidance or preservation of unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature shall not be required where such avoidance or preservation in place would preclude the construction of important 294
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
structures or infrastructure or require exorbitant expenditures, as determined by the City. Where avoidance or preservation are not appropriate for these reasons, the professional archaeologist, in consultation with the City, shall prepare a detailed recommended a treatment plan for consideration and approval by the City, which may include data recovery. If employed, data recovery strategies for unique archaeological resources that do not also qualify as historical resources of an archaeological nature shall follow the applicable requirements and limitations set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Data recovery will normally consist of (but would not be limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim of recovering important scientific data contained within the unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature. The data recovery plan shall include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and State repositories, libraries, and interested professionals. If data recovery is determined by the City to not be appropriate, then an equally effective treatment shall be proposed and implemented. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the City, in consultation with the professional archaeologist, determines that the site either: 1) does not contain unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature; or 2) that the preservation and/or treatment measures have been completed to the satisfaction of the City.
• If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the contractor shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the County Coroner (per §7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of §7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, then the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the project (§5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations 295
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, then the NAHC can mediate (§5097.94 of the Public Resources Code). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the nowork radius until the lead agency, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Impact 3.5-2: Project implementation has the
potential to disturb human remains, including
those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

LS Reference Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 LS
Impact 3.5-3: Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074,
and that is: Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or a
resource determined by the lead agency.

LS Reference Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 LS

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 3.6-1: The proposed Project may expose
people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury, or
death involving rupture of a known earthquake
fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismicrelated ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides.

LS None required. LS
Impact 3.6-2: Implementation and construction
of the proposed Project may result in substantial
soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

LS None required. LS
296
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.6-3: The proposed project has the
potential to be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of project implementation, and
potentially result in landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.

LS None required LS
Impact 3.6-4: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in development 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.

LS None required LS
Impact 3.6-5: The proposed Project does not have
the potential to 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
LS None Required. --
Impact 3.6-6: The proposed Project has the
potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature
LS Mitigation Measure 3.6-1: Prior to approval of a grading permit, the Project proponent shall ensure that grading and improvement plans include the following note: “If any paleontological resources are found during grading and construction activities of the Project, all work shall be halted immediately within a 200-foot radius of the discovery until a qualified paleontologist has evaluated the find. Work shall not continue at the discovery site until the paleontologist evaluates the find and makes a determination regarding the significance of the resource and identifies recommendations for conservation of the resource, including preserving in place or relocating on the Project site, if feasible, or collecting the resource to the extent feasible and documenting the find with the University of California Museum of Paleontology.”
LS
Impact 3.6-7: The proposed Project has the
potential to result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource recovery site
or known mineral resource of value to the region
and the residents of the state.

LS None required. --
297
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
(This project will comply with all existing regulations, rules, standards, and specifications that are already in place, including from SJVAPCD, CARB, etc.) Impact 3.7-1: Project implementation would not
generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment to conflict with an
applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases.

LS None Required. --
Impact 3.7-2: Project implementation would not
result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary
use of energy resources.

LS None required. --

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 3.8-1: Potential to create a significant
hazard through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials or through the
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment.

PS Mitigation Measure 3.8-1: Prior to the acceptance of improvements, the Project proponent shall hire a licensed well contractor to obtain a well abandonment permit from Fresno County Department of Public Health Environmental Health Division, and properly abandon the on-site wells, pursuant to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Fresno County Department of Public Health Environmental Health Division.

Mitigation Measure 3.8-2: The Project proponent shall hire a qualified consultant to perform additional testing prior to the issuance of grading permits for construction activities in the following areas that have been deemed to have potentially hazardous conditions present:
• The area near the three ASTs and four 55-gallon drums (see Figure 3.8-1 of the Draft EIR).
• The areas where USTs may exist, including near the former warehouse and former residences.

LS
298
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
• The soils in the area where farming equipment and above ground tanks have been used, and near the former warehouse and former residences (see Figure 3.8-1 of the Draft EIR).
• The area near the four pole-mounted transformers (see Figure 3.8-1 of the Draft EIR).

The intent of the additional testing is to investigate whether any of the areas, facilities, or soils contain hazardous materials. All activities (construction or demolition) in the vicinity of these materials shall comply with Cal/OSHA asbestos and lead worker construction standards. The ACBM and lead shall be disposed of properly at an appropriate offsite disposal facility. If surface staining is found on the Project site, a hazardous waste specialist shall be engaged to further assess the stained area.

Should further soil sampling be required in any stained areas, evenly distributed soil samples shall be conducted for analysis of pesticides and heavy metals. The samples shall be submitted for laboratory analysis of pesticides and heavy metals per DTSC and EPA protocols. The results of the soil sampling shall be submitted to the Fresno County Department of Public Health Environmental Health Division. If elevated levels of pesticides or heavy metals are detected during the laboratory analysis of the soils, a soil cleanup and remediation plan shall be prepared and implemented prior to the commencement of grading activities.

Further, in the event of a future release/leak of insulating fluids from any of the four polemounted transformers, PG&E shall be contacted regarding the testing of the transformers for PCB fluids or for their removal/replacement.

Impact 3.8-2: Potential to emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school.

LS None required. --
299
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.8-3: Potential to result in impacts from
being included on a list of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.8-4: The Project is not located within an
airport land use plan, two miles of a public airport
or public use airport and, would not result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.8-5: Potential to impair implementation
of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.8-6: Potential to expose people or
structures to a risk of loss, injury or death from
wildland fires.

LS None required. --

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
(This project will comply with all existing regulations, rules, standards, and specifications that are already in place, including from FID, FMFCD, RWQCB, etc.) Impact 3.9-1: The proposed Project has the
potential to violate water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.9-2: The proposed Project has the
potential to substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.9-3: The proposed Project has the
potential to alter the existing drainage pattern in
a manner which would result in substantial
erosion, siltation, flooding or polluted runoff.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.9-4: The proposed Project has the
potential to otherwise substantially degrade
water quality.

LS None required. --
300
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.9-5: The proposed Project would place
housing or structures that could impede/redirect
flows within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.9-6: The proposed Project has the
potential to expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam, seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow.

LS None required. --

LAND USE AND POPULATION
Impact 3.10-1: The proposed Project would not
physically divide an established community.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.10-2: The proposed Project would not
conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the Project adopted to avoid or mitigate an
environmental effect.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.10-3: The proposed Project would not
induce substantial population growth in an area.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.10-4: The proposed Project would not
displace substantial numbers of people or
existing housing.

LS None required. --
NOISE
Impact 3.11-1: Operational Noise- The proposed
Project has the potential to generate a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess
of standards established in the local general plan
PS Mitigation Measure 3.11-1: A 6-foot-tall barrier shall be constructed along the south boundary of the Project site, adjacent to Sunnyside Avenue and Shepherd Avenue, in order to achieve the City’s exterior noise standards. Noise barrier walls shall be constructed of concrete panels, concrete masonry units, earthen berms, or any combination of these materials that achieve the required total height. Wood is not recommended due to eventual LS
301
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies.
warping and degradation of acoustical performance. These walls must be at least 4.2 lbs/ft.

These requirements shall be included in the improvements plans prior to their approval by the City’s Public Utilities Department.

Mitigation Measure 3.11-2: The Project developer will ensure that any unshielded residential glass facades within 100 ft of the centerline of Shepherd Avenue or Sunnyside Avenue directly facing the subject roadway must have an STC rating of 30 or more. This includes any 2nd-floor windows which would not be shielded by the 6- foot sound walls.

Impact 3.11-2: Construction Noise- The proposed
Project has the potential to generate a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess
of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies.

PS Mitigation Measure 3.11-3: Construction activities shall adhere to the requirements of the City of Clovis Municipal Code with respect to hours of operation. This requirement shall be noted in the improvements plans prior to approval by the City’s Public Utilities Department.

Mitigation Measure 3.11-4: The contractor shall ensure that the following noise attenuating strategies are implemented during project construction:
• During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices.
• Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging.

LS
Impact 3.11-3: Cumulative Noise- The proposed
Project has the potential to generate a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess
of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.11-4: The proposed Project has the
potential to generate excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.11-5: For a Project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use
LS None required. --
302
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the Project expose people residing
or working in the Project area to excessive noise
levels.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Impact 3.12-1: The proposed Project has the
potential to require the construction of police
department facilities which may cause
substantial adverse physical environmental
impacts.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.12-2: The proposed Project has the
potential to require the construction of fire
department facilities which may cause
substantial adverse physical environmental
impacts.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.12-3: The proposed Project has the
potential to require the construction of school
facilities which may cause substantial adverse
physical environmental impacts.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.12-4: The proposed Project has the
potential to have effects on other public facilities.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.12-5: The proposed Project has the
potential to require the construction of park and
recreational facilities which may cause
substantial adverse physical environmental
impacts.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.12-6: The proposed Project has the
potential to increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities, such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated.

LS None required. --
303
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact 3.13-1: Project implementation would not
result in VMT increases that are greater than 87
percent of Baseline conditions.

PS Implement Project Design Measures. SU
Impact 3.13-2: Project implementation may
conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.13-3: Project implementation may
increase hazards due to a design feature,
incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency
access.

LS None required. --

UTILITIES
(This project will comply with all existing regulations, rules, standards, and specifications that are already in place, including from FID, FMFCD, RWQCB, etc.) Impact 3.14-1: The proposed Project would not
result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
Project that it does not have adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand in addition
to the providers existing commitments.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.14-2: The proposed Project would not
require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.14-3: The proposed Project has the
potential to require or result in the construction
of new water treatment facilities or expansion of
existing water facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects.

LS None required. --
304
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 3.14-4: The proposed Project does not
have the potential to have insufficient water
supplies available to serve the Project and
reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.14-5: The proposed Project has the
potential to require or result in the construction
of new stormwater drainage facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects.

LS None required. --
Impact 3.14-6: The proposed Project has the
potential to be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the Project’s
solid waste disposal needs and comply with
federal, State, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste.

LS None required. --

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 4.1: Cumulative Degradation of the
Existing Visual Character of the Region
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.2: Cumulative Damage to Scenic
Resources within a State Scenic Highway
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.3: Cumulative Impact on Light and Glare LS and LCC None required. -- Impact 4.4: Cumulative Impact on Agricultural
Resources
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.5: Cumulative Impact on the Region's Air
Quality
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.6: Cumulative Loss of Biological
Resources Including Habitats and Special Status
Species
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.7: Cumulative Impacts on Known and
Undiscovered Cultural and Tribal Resources
LS and LCC None required. --
305
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CC – cumulatively considerable LCC – less than cumulatively considerable LS – less than significant PS – potentially significant B – beneficial impact SU – significant and unavoidable ES-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Impact 4.8: Cumulative Impact on Geologic and
Soils Resources
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.9: Cumulative Impact on Climate
Change from Increased Project-Related
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.10: Cumulative Impact on the
Inefficient, Wasteful, or Unnecessary Use of
Energy Resources
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.11: Cumulative Impact Related to
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.12: Cumulative Increases in Peak
Stormwater Runoff from the Project site
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.13: Cumulative Impacts Related to
Degradation of Water Quality
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.14: Cumulative Impacts Related to
Degradation of Groundwater Supply or Recharge
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.15: Cumulative Impacts Related to
Flooding
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.16: Cumulative Impact on Communities
and Local Land Uses
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.17: Cumulative Impacts on Population
and Housing
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.18: Cumulative Exposure of Existing and
Future Noise-Sensitive Land Uses to Increased
Noise Resulting from Cumulative Development
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.19: Cumulative Impact on Public
Services and Recreation
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.20: Under Cumulative conditions,
Project implementation would not result in VMT
increases that are greater than 87 percent of
Baseline conditions
PS Implement Project Design measures. CC and SU
Impact 4.21: Under Cumulative conditions, the
proposed Project would not conflict with a
LS and LCC None required. --
306
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE

WITHOUT

MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURE

RESULTING

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
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
Impact 4.22: Cumulative Impact on Wastewater
Utilities
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.23: Cumulative Impact on Water
Utilities
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.24: Cumulative Impact on Stormwater
Facilities
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.25: Cumulative Impact on Solid Waste
Facilities
LS and LCC None required. --
Impact 4.26: Cumulative Impact from Electrical,
Natural Gas, or Telecommunications Facilities
LS and LCC None required. --
307
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
308
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

INTRODUCTION 1.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 1.0-1

1.1 PURPOSE AND INTENDED USES OF THE EIR
The City of Clovis, as the lead agency, determined that the proposed Shepherd North Project is a "project" within the definition of CEQA. CEQA requires the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approving any project, which may have a significant impact on the environment.

An EIR must disclose the expected environmental impacts, 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. CEQA requires government agencies to consider and, where feasible, minimize environmental impacts of proposed development, and an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives, including economic, environmental, and social factors.

The City of Clovis, as the lead agency, has prepared this Draft EIR to provide the public and responsible and trustee agencies with an objective analysis of the potential environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. The environmental review process enables interested parties to evaluate the proposed Project in terms of its environmental consequences, to examine and recommend methods to eliminate or reduce potential adverse impacts, and to consider a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. This EIR will be used by the City of Clovis to determine whether to approve, modify, or deny the proposed Project and associated approvals in light of the Project’s environmental effects. The EIR will be used as the primary environmental document to evaluate full development, all associated infrastructure improvements, and permitting actions associated with the proposed Project. All of the actions and components of the proposed Project are described in detail in Chapter 2.0, Project Description.

1.2 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 Project-level EIR, which is described in State CEQA Guidelines § 15161 as: “The most common type of EIR (which) examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project. The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.”

1.3 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 proposed Project or an aspect of the proposed 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). The following agencies are considered “Responsible Agencies” or “Trustee 309
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Agencies” for the proposed Project, and may be required to issue permits or approve certain aspects of the proposed Project:
• Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) – SOI Amendment, Annexation, and Detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District;
• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) approval prior to construction activities pursuant to the Clean Water Act;
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) - Approval of construction-related air quality permits; and
• Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District – Review of stormwater facilities, grading, and street improvements.

1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The review and certification process for the EIR has involved, or will involve, the following general procedural steps:

NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City of Clovis circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed Project on May 9, 2022 to the State Clearinghouse, State Responsible Agencies, State Trustee Agencies, Other Public Agencies, Organizations and Interested Persons. A public scoping meeting was held on May 25, 2022 to present the project description to the public and interested agencies, and to receive comments from the public and interested agencies regarding the scope of the environmental analysis to be included in the Draft EIR. Concerns raised in response to the NOP were considered during preparation of the Draft EIR. The NOP and comments received on the NOP by interested parties are presented in Appendix A.

DRAFT EIR
This document constitutes the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR contains a description of the proposed Project, description of the environmental setting, identification of project impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. This Draft EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts.

Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in this EIR.

Upon completion of the Draft 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. Additionally, the City of Clovis will file the Notice of Availability with the County Clerk and have it published in a newspaper of regional circulation to begin the local public review period. 310
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

INTRODUCTION 1.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 1.0-3

PUBLIC NOTICE/PUBLIC REVIEW
The City of Clovis will provide a public notice of availability for the Draft EIR, and invite comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. Consistent with CEQA, the review period for this Draft EIR is forty-five (45) days. Public comment on the Draft EIR will be accepted in written form. All comments or questions regarding the Draft EIR should be addressed to:

Attn: George González, MPA | Senior Planner
City of Clovis | Planning Division
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
Phone: 559.324.2383
Email: [email protected]

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS/FINAL EIR
Following the public review period, a Final EIR will be prepared. The Final EIR will respond to written comments received during the public review period and to oral comments received at a public hearing during such review period.

CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR/PROJECT CONSIDERATION
The City will review and consider the Final EIR. If the City finds that the Final EIR is "adequate and complete," the City Council may certify the Final EIR in accordance with CEQA. The rule of adequacy generally holds that an EIR can be certified if:
1) The EIR shows a good faith effort at full disclosure of environmental information; and 2) The EIR provides sufficient analysis to allow decisions to be made regarding the proposed Project in contemplation of environmental considerations.

The level of detail contained throughout this EIR is consistent with Section 15151 of the CEQA Guidelines and recent court decisions, which provide the standard of adequacy on which this document is based. The Guidelines state as follows:

An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of the environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.

Following review and consideration of the Final EIR, the City may take action to approve, modify, or reject the Project. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as described below, would also be adopted in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) and CEQA Guidelines 311
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Section 15097 for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into or imposed upon the Project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be designed to ensure that these measures are carried out during Project implementation, in a manner that is consistent with the EIR.

1.5 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, alternatives, significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. Discussion of the environmental issues addressed in the Draft EIR was established through review of environmental and planning documentation developed for the proposed Project, environmental and planning documentation prepared for recent projects located within the City of Clovis, applicable local and regional planning documents, and responses to the Notice of Preparation (NOP).

This Draft EIR is organized in the following manner:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This 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 proposed 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.

CHAPTER 1.0 – INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1.0 briefly describes the purpose of the environmental evaluation, identifies the lead, trustee, and responsible agencies, summarizes the process associated with preparation and certification of an EIR, and identifies the scope and organization of the Draft EIR.

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, related improvements, 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. 312
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

INTRODUCTION 1.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 1.0-5 Regulatory Setting. A description of the regulatory environment that may be applicable to the proposed 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 appropriate mitigation measures, and a conclusion as to the significance of each impact.

The following environmental topics are addressed in this section:
• Aesthetics and Visual Resources
• Agricultural Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural and Tribal Resources
• Geology, Soils, and Minerals
• Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change, and Energy
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use, Population, and Housing
• Noise
• Public Services and Recreation
• Transportation and Circulation
• Utilities
• Wildfire
CHAPTER 4.0 – OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS
Chapter 4.0 evaluates and describes the following CEQA required topics: impacts considered lessthan-significant, significant and irreversible impacts, growth-inducing effects, cumulative, and significant and unavoidable environmental effects.

CHAPTER 5.0 – ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the proposed Project and avoid and/or lessen any significant environmental effects of the proposed Project.

Chapter 5.0 provides a comparative analysis between the environmental impacts of the proposed Project and the selected alternatives.

CHAPTER 6 – REPORT PREPARERS
This section lists all authors and agencies that assisted in the preparation of the EIR, by name, title, and company or agency affiliation.
313
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

APPENDICES
This section includes all notices and other procedural documents pertinent to the EIR, as well as technical material prepared to support the analysis.

1.6 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City of Clovisreceived eleven (11) written comment letters on the NOP for the proposed Project.

Copies of the letters is provided in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. The commenting agency/citizen is provided below. The City also held a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2022.

1. Native American Heritage Commission (May 10, 2022)

2. Department of Toxic Substances Control (May 18, 2022)

3. Robert Shuman (May 25, 2022)

4. Jared Callister (May 25, 2022)

5. State Water Resources Control Board (June 6, 2022)

6. California Department of Conservation (May 26, 2022)

7. County of Fresno (June 2, 2022)

8. Fresno Irrigation District (June 7, 2022)

9. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (June 10, 2022)

10. California Department of Transportation (June 10, 2022)

11. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (June 10, 2022)

1.7 POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN
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:
• Agricultural: conversion of farmland, impacts to adjacent farmland, cumulative loss of farmland, compatibility with Williamson Act contracts, impacts on agricultural operations, mitigation measures for agricultural impacts;
• Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Energy: project related air emissions, construction emissions, operations emissions, quantification of emissions, health risk screening/assessment, ambient air quality, emissions reduction, vegetation barriers/urban greening, clean lawn/garden equipment, District rules/regulations, • Biological: Swainson’s hawk and other raptors;
• Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Use or storage of hazardous materials and wastes, underground petroleum storage tanks, protection of groundwater, proper destruction of wells and septic tanks, appropriate construction equipment operations and maintenance, • Hydrology/Water Supply Concerns: well water recharge/groundwater, irrigation, water supply; non-potable water supply, flood control/drainage, impervious surfaces, storm drainage easements;
• Land Use and Planning: Affordable housing;
• Noise: Compliance with the Noise Element, elevated noise levels; 314
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

INTRODUCTION 1.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 1.0-7 • Traffic: Need for a traffic study, additional traffic, need for street improvements, need for improvements on internal roads and access to Fowler/Behymer; vehicle miles traveled, intersections Herndon Avenue/Fowler, and SR168/Shepherd Avenue, multimodal transportation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, public transportation, connectivity between residential and commercial/retail uses, feasible mitigation, EV charging; • Utilities: Costs of utility expansion, cumulative impacts. 315
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
316
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2.0-1

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The Shepherd North Project (Project) site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line at the northeast corner of North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue. The Project site is bounded on the north by Perrin Road, on the east by North Fowler Avenue, on the south by East Shepherd Avenue, and on the west by North Sunnyside Avenue. Figures 2.0-1 and 2.0-2 show the proposed Project’s regional location and vicinity. The Project site is in the southwest quadrant of Section 21, Township 12 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM). Figure 2.0-3 illustrates the Annexation Area.

2.2 PROJECT SITE DEFINED
The Project site includes several distinct planning boundaries. The following terms are used throughout this document to describe planning area boundaries within the Project site:
• Project Area – Includes the whole of the Project site (approximately 155 acres), encompassing the approximate 77-acre Development Area and the approximate 78-acre Non-Development Area.1

o Development Area - Includes the parcels being annexed that will be entitled for subdivision and development. This will include a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Pre-zone, Annexation/Reorganization, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, and Residential Site Plan Review. o Non-Development Area - Includes the parcels being included in the SOI expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development. This includes two separate areas, each described as an Expansion SubArea. The two Expansion SubAreas total 78 acres and are defined as Expansion SubArea North and Expansion SubArea East.

2.3 PROJECT SETTING

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The Project site is approximately 155 acres and includes 39 Assessor parcels (APNs), as depicted in Figure

2.0-5.

SITE TOPOGRAPHY
The Project site is relatively flat and is approximately 385 feet above mean sea level. Reference is made to Figure 2.0-4. USGS Topographic Map.

EXISTING SITE USES
The Development Area primarily contains farmland (orchard). Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the east-west centerline of the area, one located in the 1 It should be noted that the term ‘Project Area’ is used interchangeably with ‘Project Site’, throughout this EIR. 317
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foottall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

Expansion SubArea North: Includes single-family residences that are accessed by North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue. North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue are unimproved roadways with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. North Sunnyside Avenue located to the west and Perrin Road to the north are also unimproved County roadways.

There are 18 APNs in SubArea North.

Expansion SubArea East: Includes single-family residences located between the Project site and North Fowler Avenue. North Fowler Avenue is a two-lane unimproved County roadway with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. There are 18 APNs in SubArea East.

Figure 2.0-6 provides an aerial map of the Project site.

EXISTING SURROUNDING USES
The Project site is surrounded by a variety of residential land uses. Uses immediately adjacent to the north and east boundary of the Project site include rural residential uses on larger lots, some having small orchards. Uses to the south of the Project site contain a mix of residential uses, as well as rural residential on larger lots and medium-high density residential in a developed smaller lot residential subdivision. West of the Project site is an electrical power substation and a graded area that is being prepared for additional residential development.

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING
The following section outlines the City and County General Plan land use designations and zoning for the Project site. The Project site is currently outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Clovis, and therefore does not have a City of Clovis zoning designation.

City of Clovis
The City of Clovis General Plan was adopted on August 25, 2014. Figure 2.0-7 depicts the land use designations for the Project site and the surrounding areas under the adopted City of Clovis General Plan.

The Project site is designated as Rural Residential (RR) under the City of Clovis General Plan.

Rural Residential (RR): Very low-density residential uses and small-scale agricultural operations. Rural residential uses may be dispersed uniformly across the land or be sited so to leave more acreage for 318
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2.0-3 orchards, pastures, or other agricultural or open space activities. The allowable maximum density for this land use designation is one dwelling unit per two acres.

Fresno County
Figure 2.0-8 identifies the Fresno County land use designations and zoning for the Project site and the surrounding area. The Development Area is designated as Low Density Residential by the County’s General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned AL-20 (Limited Agricultural) by the County. This land use designation is an urban holding land use designation by Fresno County.

The Non-Development Area is designated as Rural Residential by the County’s General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned RR (Rural Residential) by the County. This land use designation is an urban land use designation. . At the time Fresno County created the Rural Residential land use designation and assigned that land use designation to areas within the county, the Fresno County General Plan was segregated into two segments; Non Intensive and Intensive, development polices. The Fresno County General Plan Non Intensive section defines county goals and polices regarding agriculture, open space and riverine area protection, mineral extraction, etc. Whereas the Intensive section of the plan defines County goals and policies regarding residential development, directing urban development to cites, lands in city fringe areas as well as unincorporated communities.

The Development Area is bounded on the north and east by Rural Residential developments classified as Intensive development in the County General Plan. To the west and south are Low Density Residential uses. The Development Area is an island surrounded by Intensive development.

2.4 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A clear statement of objectives and the underlying purpose of the proposed Project are discussed per CEQA Guidelines Section 151024(b).

PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The principal Project objective is the expansion of the City’s SOI to include the Project site, and the annexation/reorganization, approval and subsequent development of the Development Area.

The quantifiable objectives include the development of up to 605 single-family residential units. The quantifiable objectives include the development of open space totaling approximately 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks. The Project objectives also include the installation of new public and private roadways that will provide pedestrian and vehicular access to the Project site and surrounding community areas, and other improvements, including water supply, storm drainage, sewer facilities and landscaping to serve the residential uses.

The goals of the proposed development are as follows:
• Provide residential housing opportunities that are visually attractive and accommodate the future housing demand in Clovis, consistent with policies stated in A Landscape of Choice to modestly increase urban density.
319
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Establish a mixture of housing types, sizes and densities that collectively provide for local and regional housing demand, consistent with City requirements as stated in the latest Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA).
• Provide infrastructure that meets City standards and is integrated with existing and planned facilities and connections.
• Establish a logical phasing plan designed to ensure that each phase of development would include necessary public improvements required to meet City standards. • Expand the City’s Sphere of Influence in order to establish a logical and orderly boundary that promotes the efficient extension of municipal services.

2.5 PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The proposed Project will require a General Plan Land Use Amendment to adjust the land uses from Rural Residential (RR) to Medium High Density (MH) for the Development Area to accommodate the proposed development density.
• Medium High Density (MH). This designation identifies areas appropriate small lot single family detached homes, townhouses, duplexes, and apartments. The allowable density range is 7.1 to

15.0 units per acre.

The proposed General Plan land use designations for the Project site is shown on Figure 2.0-9.

PRE-ZONING
The Project site is currently located outside of the Clovis city limits, and therefore does not have Citydesignated zoning. The proposed Project includes a request for Development Area pre-zoning (which is consistent with the proposed General Plan Land Uses):

Development Area: The pre-zoning request is for R-1-PRD zoning designations over these lots. • Single-Family Planned Residential Development Zoning (R-1-PRD). This designation identifies areas appropriate for single-family small lot uses, including attached and detached single-family structures on small lots. The allowable density range is 4.1 to 15.0 units per acre, with the level of density determined by compliance with performance standards. The R-1-PRD district required a planned development permit. The R-1-PRD district is consistent with the Medium and MediumHigh Density Residential land use designations of the General Plan.

The proposed City of Clovis zoning for the Project site is shown on Figure 2.0-10. 320
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2.0-5

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
The proposed Project includes a Tentative Subdivision Map for the Development Area that is planned for development in phases. The Tentative Map covers approximately 77 acres within three Assessor parcels (APNs); 557-021-20, -19, and -21.

The Tentative Subdivision Map will result in the subdivision of a total of approximately 77 acres into up to 605 single-family residential units, with an additional 52 out lots for roads, utilities, greenspace, landscaping, and pedestrian paths. The Project objectives also include the installation of new public roadways that will provide pedestrian and vehicular access to the Project site and surrounding community areas, and other improvements, including water supply, storm drainage, sewer facilities and landscaping.

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The proposed Project includes a Planned Development Permit (PDP) for the Development Area of the Project, which will incorporate a program of enhanced amenities (e.g., additional open space, park improvements and/or trail development). The PDP may allow for modifications to the applicable development standards, such as lot coverage, setbacks and building heights.

Figure 2.0-11a, 2.0-11b, and 2.0-11c illustrate the proposed site plans for the Development Area.

ANNEXATION/REORGANIZATION
The proposed Project includes an annexation of three APNs totaling approximately 77 acres. This acreage includes the Development Area.

RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW
The proposed Project includes a Residential Site Plan Review (RSPR) for the Development Area as a condition of a subdivision map implementing provisions of zoning.

SPHERE OF INFLUENCE EXPANSION
The proposed Project includes an amendment of the City’s SOIto include the entirety of the approximately 155-acre Project site. The area is currently located in the City’s Planning Area, but outside of the City’s SOI. The amendment of the City’s SOI will require an application and approval by the Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and the County of Fresno.

2.6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed Project is primarily a residential development anticipated to provide up to 605 residential units. The Development Project would provide open space totaling approximately 5.54 acres, including

2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks. Other uses to support and compliment the proposed residential development include public utility infrastructure, public and private roadways, curb/gutters/sidewalks, other pedestrian facilities, private parking, street lighting, and street signage.
321
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Housing development will depend on market conditions and demand. The plan for infrastructure allows for development to occur in phases to respond to the market conditions and demand.

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The proposed Project will provide a variety of housing types and lot sizes that will accommodate a range of housing objectives and buyer needs with a goal to ensure housing for a variety of families and lifestyles.

The Development Area will accommodate up to 605 residential units. Specifically, the northern portion of the Development Area is planned to include the development of up to 101 single-family residences with lot sizes ranging from approximately 5,400 square feet to 15,900 square feet. The southern portion of the Development Area is planned for smaller lot single-family residences, with lot sizes ranging from approximately 1,980 to 3,800 square feet, and with larger corner lots that are approximately 4,200 to 7,500 square feet. Figure 2.0-11a, 2.0-11b and 2.0-11c illustrate the Project site plans.

GREENSPACE
The proposed Project includes open space totaling approximately 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails,

2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks . The main park would be located within the central portion of the Development Area, which would connect to a network of promenades and trails located within and along the perimeter of a portion of the Development Area. The promenade and trail network would also link to adjacent trails located in the planned residential community to the west, as well as the trail at Dog Creek and Old Town Clovis to the south.

CIRCULATION
The proposed Project includes a hierarchy of roadways to accommodate the capacity needs of the existing street network as well as provide additional vehicular access to the Development Area. North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue are the main arterial roadways providing access to the Development Area.

The neighborhoods within the Development Area will include a network of public and private residential streets to provide an efficient flow of traffic through the area. Sidewalks will also be included per the City standards.

UTILITIES AND PLANNED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
The construction of on-site infrastructure improvements would be required to accommodate development of the Development Area, as described below.

Water System
The Project site will be served by a new potable and non-potable water distribution system. The proposed water system will be located within the proposed public utilities easements and be connected to existing City mains and will comply with City Master Plans and standards. The City of Clovis provides water supplies to the City of Clovis. The City has three main water supply sources: groundwater, surface water, and recycled water. The City extracts groundwater from the Kings Subbasin. Surface water is delivered to the City by the Fresno Irrigation District (FID). The various surface water supplies are from the Kings River and 322
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2.0-7 Central Valley Project. The City’s Water Reuse Facility produces tertiary treated effluent that can be used for agriculture or landscape irrigation.

Wastewater System
The Project site will be served by a new wastewater collection system installed within proposed public utilities easements. The proposed wastewater conveyance facilities will connect to the existing sewer mains as part of the City of Clovis collection and treatment system. Wastewater treatment will be provided at the existing Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant in the City of Fresno. By agreement with the City of Fresno, the City of Clovis is entitled to a maximum capacity of 9.3 million gallons per day (mgd). The Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant has a maximum capacity of 80 mgd and is owned by Fresno and Clovis, and is operated by the City of Fresno. If required, the City has the capability to acquire additional capacity at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Wastewater treatment will also be provided by the City’s Water Reuse Facility. The plant serves the new growth areas of the City in the southeast, northwest, and ultimately the northeast urban centers. The plant is designed to accommodate future expansion and will ultimately treat 8.4 mgd.

Storm Drainage
The Project site will include construction of a new storm drainage system, which will conform to applicable standards and requirements. The storm drainage collection and detention system will be subject to the State Water Resources Control Board Requirements (SWRCB), the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD), and City of Clovisregulations, standards, and specifications. This includes, but not limited to the municipal NPDES storm water discharge permit, as well as any City required Best Management Practices to control the volume, rate, and potential pollutant load of storm water runoff. Stormwater throughout the City is collected in FMFCD’s basins.

Regulated Public Utilities
Electrical, provided by PG&E; phone, provided by AT&T; cable, provided by Comcast; and related internet services would be extended to all portions of the Project site from existing facilities located along E.

Shepherd Avenue and from existing residential development surrounding the Project site. Proposed utilities would be located within public utility easements to be dedicated along street frontages. Utility improvements would be installed in conjunction with planned street improvements.

2. 7 ALTERNATIVES
Four alternatives to the proposed Project were developed based on input from City staff. The alternatives that are anticipated to be analyzed in the EIR include the following four alternatives in addition to the proposed Project.
• No Project (No Build) Alternative: Under this alternative, development of the Project site would not occur, and the Project site would remain in its current existing condition. • Increased Density Mixed Use Alternative: Under this alternative, the proposed Project would be developed at a higher density for the residential uses, and would also include a mixed-use component to the alternative. Approximately 62 acres would be developed with 605 residential units under the medium high density residential use, 10 acres would be developed with 195 323
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North apartments under the high density residential use, and 5 acres would be developed with 108,000 square feet under the neighborhood commercial use.
• Reduced Density Alternative: Under this alternative, the proposed Project would have a reduced density for the residential uses. Approximately 150 residential units would be developed under the very low-density residential designation.
• Reduced Sphere of Influence Alternative: Physically, there is little difference between the proposed Project and this alternative. It is noted, however, that the reduction in the SOI would eliminate the possibility of the Non-Development Area connecting to City services at some point in the future if desired by those residents.

NO PROJECT (NO BUILD) ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Project (No Build) Alternative development of the Project site would not occur, and the Project site would remain in its current existing condition. It is noted that the No Project (No Build) Alternative would fail to meet the Project objectives.

INCREASED DENSITY MIXED USE ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative, the proposed Project would be developed at a higher density for the residential uses and would also include a mixed-use component to the alternative. Approximately 80 percent of the Development Area (62 acres) would be developed with 605 residential units (9.75 du/ac). This would still fall under the Medium High Density (MH) 7.1–15.0 du/ac land use category. The remaining 15 acres of the Development Area would be developed with a mix of commercial and higher density residential. The mixed-use area would have 10 acres for High Density (H) 15.1–25.0 du/ac. The alternative assumes 195 apartments constructed at a density of 19.5 du/ac. There would also be 5 acres of Neighborhood Commercial (NC) (Max FAR 0.50). This area would be developed as a neighborhood‐scale shopping facility.

The FAR would allow for 108,000 square feet of commercial. It is anticipated that the commercial would include an anchor store such as a small supermarket with a wide range of ancillary uses including banks, restaurants, service businesses, and other related activities are generally found in these planned commercial centers.

REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative, the proposed Project would have a reduced density in the Development Area that would fall under the Very Low Density (VL) 0.6–2.0 du/ac land use. The alternative assumes 150 residential units at approximately 2 du/ac. This use is described as large lot single family residences and appurtenant structures within an identifiable residential neighborhood. This alternative would include neighborhood parks and all the infrastructure necessary to connect to City services.

REDUCED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ALTERNATIVE
Under this alternative, the proposed Project would only expand the Sphere of Influence and annex the Developed Area and would exclude the 78-acre Sphere of Influence (SOI) expansion to the north and east of the Development Area. Physically, there is little difference between the proposed Project and this alternative. It is noted, however, that the reduction in the SOI would eliminate that possibility of the NonDevelopment Area connecting to City services at some point in the future, if desired by those residents. 324
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2.0-9

2.8 USES OF THE EIR AND REQUIRED AGENCY APPROVALS
This EIR 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 will be the Lead Agency for the proposed Project, pursuant to the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, Section 15050. Actions that would be required from the City include, but are not limited to the following:
• Certification of the EIR;
• Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; • Approval of City of Clovis General Plan Amendment (Land Use Element); • Approval of City of Clovis Zoning Pre-zoning;
• Approval of Residential Site Plan Review;
• Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Maps;
• Approval of Planned Development Permit;
• Approval of SOI Expansion and Authorization to submit SOI Amendment request to Fresno LAFCo and County of Fresno;
• Approval of Annexation of the Development Area and Inhabited Area and Authorization to submit Annexation request to Fresno LAFCo and County of Fresno; • Approval of future Final Maps;
• Approval of future Planned Development Permit;
• Approval of future Grading Plans;
• City review, approval, of construction and utility plans; and • Approval of future Building Permits.

OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY APPROVALS
The following agencies may be required to issue permits or approve certain aspects of the proposed Project. Other governmental agencies that may require approval include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) – SOI Amendment, Annexation, and Detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District;
• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) approval prior to construction activities pursuant to the Clean Water Act;
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) - Approval of construction-related air quality permits; and
• Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District – review of stormwater facilities, grading, and street improvements.
325
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
326
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Kerman
Fowler
Dinuba
Kingsburg
San Joaquin
Orange Cove
Reedley
Selma
Parlier
Sanger
Clovis
Fresno
Chowchilla
Madera

F R E S N O C O U N T Y
UV180
UV145
UV41
UV41
UV41
UV216
UV168
UV269
UV99
UV49
UV41
UV43
UV201
UV99
UV180
UV145
UV63
UV180
Mammoth Pool
Reservoir Owens
Reservoir
Bass
Lake
Mariposa
Reservoir
Eastman
Lake
Huntington
Lake
Redinger
Lake
Shaver Lake
Kerckhoff
Lake
Hensley
Lake
Berenda
Reservoir
Madera
Equalization
Reservoir
Millerton
Lake
Madera Lake
Lost Lake
Pine Flat
Reservoir
Avocado
Lake

WILLOW CR

KINGS R

CHOWCHILLA R

WILLOW CR

SAN JOAQUIN R

SAN J OAQUIN R

KINGS R
±
0 2½ 5
Miles
LEGEND
Incorporated Area
Fresno County
California Counties
Figure 2.0-1. Regional Location
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
Project Location
327
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
328
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

UV168
UV168
UV168
Dry
Creek
Trailhead
Town
& Country
Park
Deauville
Park
European
Parc Park
Linear
Park
Pinnacles
Park
Lennar
Park
Countryside
Park
Railroad Park
Dry Creek
Park
Williamsburg
Manor Park
Quail
Hollow
Park
Cambridge
Colony Park
Birchwood
Estates Park
Cottonwood
Park
Been
Park
Sierra
Bicentennial
Park
Sierra
Meadows
Park
Woods
Elementary
School
Dry Creek
Elementary
School
Buchanan
High School
Century
Elementary
School
Cedarwood
Elementary
School
Gateway
High
School
Cole
Elementary
School
Liberty
Middle
School
Mickey Cox
Elementary
School
Clark
Intermediate
School

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

NEES AVE

ARMSTRONG AVE

TEMPERANCE AVE
CLOVIS
AVE

TEAGUE AVE

BULLARD AVE

SIERRA AVE

ALLUVIAL AVE

PEACH AVE

LOCAN AVE

HERNDON AVE

MINNEWAWA AVE

FIFTH ST

DUKE AVE

CINDY AVE

TOLLHOUSE RD

VILLA AVE

SPRUCE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

HELM AVE
±
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits
Park
School
Figure 2.0-2. Vicinity Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
Enterprise Canal
Dry Creek
329
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
330
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Dry Creek
Trailhead
Town
& Country
Park

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BURL AVE
B
URGAN
AV
E

PIONEER AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

BUNDY AVE

FOWLER AVEWHITTIER AVE

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

PRESCOTTAVE

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

POWERS AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

PURDUE AVE VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

RENN AVE

STANFORD AVE

PROVINCE DR

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
0 200 400
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
Figure 2.0-3. Annexation Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
331
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
332
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
±
0 800400
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits Figure 2.0-4. USGS Topographic Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS; ArcGIS Online USGS Topographic Map Service.

Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
333
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
334
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
55702101
55702102
55702103
55702104 55702105
55702106
55702107
55702108
55702109 55702110
55702111
55702112
55702113
55702114
55702115
55702116
55702118 55702117
55702119 55702120
55702121
55702122S
55702123S
55702124S
55702125S
55702126S
55702127S
55702128S
55702129S
55702130S
55702131S
55702132S
55702133S
55702134S
55702135S
55702140S
55702141S
55702142S
55702143S

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE GLEN KIPPEN LN

GLEN ALVA LN

LEXINGTON AVE

PERRIN AVE

PURDUE AVE
±
LEGEND
Project Parcel
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits
Developement Area
0 100 200
Feet
Figure 2.0-5. Accessor Parcel Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
335
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
336
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BLOOM AVE

GLEN ALVA LN

GLEN KIPPEN LN

GLEN BROUGHTON LN

MC ARTHUR AVE

DUKE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

PERRIN AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

FOWLER AVE

PERRIN AVE
S
TA
N

FORD AVE

SERENA AVE

GLEN DUNBAR LN

PURDUE AVE
±
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits 0 100 200
Feet
Figure 2.0-6. Aerial of Project Site
Sources: Fresno County GIS; ArcGIS Online World Imagery Map Service(04/08/2022).

Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
337
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
338
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE GLEN KIPPEN LN

BURL AVE
B
U
RGAN
AV
E

PIONEER AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

FOWLER AVE

WHITTIER AVE

GLEN ALVA LN

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

ELM AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

GLEN OBAN LN

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

BUNDY AVE

POWERS AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

PURDUE AVE VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

RENN AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

GLEN DUNBAR LN

PROVINCE DR

LOYOLA AVE

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
City of Clovis General Plan Land Use
RR: Rural Residential
VL: Very Low Density Residential
L: Low Density Residential
M: Medium Density Residential
MH: Medium High Density Residential
GC: General Commercial
P: Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
PK: Park
W: Water
0 200 400
Feet
Figure 2.0-7. City of
Clovis General Plan Land
Use Designations
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
339
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
340
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

ELM AVE

BURL AVE
B

URGAN AV
E

PIONEER AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

DUKE AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE RUSS

EL L AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

VINTAGE AVE

WINDMILL AVE

STANFORD AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

FARMHOUSEAVE

PERRIN AVE

PHILLIP AVE

SERENA AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

PROVINCE DR

PERRIN AVE

PURDUE AVE

BLOOM AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

ELM AVE

BURL AVE
B

URGAN AV
E

PIONEER AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

DUKE AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE RUSS

EL L AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

VINTAGE AVE

WINDMILL AVE

STANFORD AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

FARMHOUSEAVE

PERRIN AVE

PHILLIP AVE

SERENA AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

PROVINCE DR

PERRIN AVE

PURDUE AVE

BLOOM AVE
±
0 200 400
Feet
Figure 2.0-8. Fresno
County General Plan Land
Use and Zoning
Designations
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

Fresno County Zoning
AE20
AL20
C-2
P-F
R-1
R-1-7500
R-1-PRD
R-2
R-A
RR
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
Fresno County General Plan Land Use
Rural Residential
Low Density Residential
Fresno County General Plan
Land Use Designation
Fresno County Zoning

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
341
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
342
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BURL AVE
B
U
RGAN
AV
E

PIONEER AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

FOWLER AVE

WHITTIER AVE

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

BUNDY AVE

POWERS AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

PURDUE AVE VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

RENN AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

PROVINCE DR

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
City of Clovis General Plan Land Use
RR: Rural Residential
VL: Very Low Density Residential
L: Low Density Residential
M: Medium Density Residential
MH: Medium High Density Residential
GC: General Commercial
P: Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
PK: Park
W: Water
0 200 400
Feet
Figure 2.0-9. Proposed
General Plan Land Use
Designations
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
343
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
344
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

C-2
P-F
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1-7500
R-1-AH
R-1-PRD
R-2
R-2
R-A
R-R
AE20 AL20
RR
RR
RR
RR
RR
AL20

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BURL AVE
B
URGAN
AV
E

PIONEER AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

FOWLER AVE

WHITTIER AVE

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

PRESCOTT AVE

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

BUNDY AVE

POWERS AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

PURDUE AVE VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

RENN AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

PROVINCE DR

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
City of Clovis Zoning
C-2
P-F
R-1
R-1-7500
R-1-AH
R-1-PRD
R-2
R-A
R-R
Fresno County Zoning
AE20
AL20
R-R
0 200 400
Feet
Figure 2.0-10. Proposed Zoning
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

R-1-PRD
R-1-PRD

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
345
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
346
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Figure 2.0-11a. Tentative Subdivision
Map North
Sources: Harbour Associates. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
347
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
348
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Figure 2.0-11b. Tentative Subdivision
Map Southwest
Sources: Harbour Associates. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
349
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
350
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Figure 2.0-11c. Tentative Subdivision
Map Southeast
Sources: Harbour Associates. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
351
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
352
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-1 The City of Clovis possesses multiple scenic resources, and there are also scenic resources within the unincorporated areas of Fresno County. These resources enhance the quality of life for Clovis residents, and provide for outdoor recreational uses. Landscapes can be defined as a combination of four visual elements: landforms, water, vegetation, and man-made structures. Scenic resource quality is an assessment of the uniqueness or desirability of a visual element. This section provides a background discussion of the scenic highways and corridors, and natural scenic resources such as creeks, wildlife areas, and prominent visual features found in the Project site. This section is organized with an existing setting, regulatory setting, and impact analysis.

This section was prepared based on existing reports and literature for Clovis and the surrounding areas in Fresno County. Additional sources of information included the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans) Designated Scenic Route map for Fresno County.

There were no comments received during the NOP comment period related to this environmental topic.

3.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

REGIONAL SCENIC RESOURCES
Visual resources are generally classified into two categories: scenic views and scenic resources.

Scenic views are elements of the broader viewshed such as mountain ranges, valleys, and ridgelines.

They are usually mid-ground or background elements of a viewshed that can be seen from a range of viewpoints, often along a roadway or other corridor. Scenic resources are specific features of a viewing area (or viewshed) such as trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings. They are specific features that act as the focal point of a viewshed and are usually foreground elements.

Aesthetically significant features occur in a diverse array of environments within the region, ranging in character from urban centers to rural agricultural lands to natural water bodies. Features of the built environment that may also have visual significance include individual or groups of structures that are distinctive due to their aesthetic, historical, social, or cultural significance or characteristics.

Examples of the visually significant built environment may include bridges or overpasses, architecturally appealing buildings or groups of buildings, landscaped freeways, and a location where a historic event occurred.

SCENIC HIGHWAYS AND CORRIDORS
Scenic highways and corridors make major contributions to the quality of life enjoyed by the residents of a region. The development of community pride, the enhancement of property values, and the protection of aesthetically-pleasing open spaces reflecting a preference for the local lifestyle are all ways in which scenic corridors are valuable to residents.

Scenic highways and corridors can also strengthen the tourist industry. For many visitors, highway corridors will provide their only experience of the region. Enhancement and protection of these 353
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North corridors ensures that the tourist experience continues to be a positive one and, consequently, provides support for the tourist-related activities of the region's economy.

Scenic Highways
A scenic highway is generally defined by Caltrans as a public highway that traverses an area of outstanding scenic quality, containing striking views, flora, geology, or other unique natural attributes. A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view.

No officially designated State scenic highways are located in the City of Clovis. The nearest “eligible” State scenic highway to the City is State Route 168, which is located in Fresno County northeast of the City of Clovis. The Project site is not visible from this roadway segment.

Scenic Corridors
A scenic corridor is the view from the road that may include a distant panorama and/or the immediate roadside area. A scenic corridor encompasses the outstanding natural features and landscapes that are considered scenic. It is the visual quality of the man-made or natural environments within a scenic corridor that are responsible for its scenic value. Commonly, the physical limits of a scenic corridor are broken down into foreground views (zero to one quarter mile) and distant views (over one quarter mile). In addition to distinct foreground and distant views, the visual quality of a scenic corridor is defined by special features, which include:
● Focal points - prominent natural or man-made features which immediately catch the eye. ● Transition areas - locations where the visual environment changes dramatically. ● Gateways - locations which mark the entrance to a community or geographic area.

The adopted 1993 Clovis General Plan discusses scenic “landscape features” in its Open Space and Conservation Element. The element identifies Clovis, Shaw, and Herndon Avenues as gateways to the community and important visual links to Old Town Clovis from the greater Fresno Area. The Open Space and Conservation Element states that “the identity of the gateways will be established through landscape design and features reflecting the historic and ‘small town’ atmosphere.” Although the three identified corridors are quite long and contain substantial segments that do not provide scenic vistas, the corridors physically and visually tie the community together. Other arterial roadways that travel east-to-west through the City of Clovis, such as Shepherd, Bullard, and Ashlan Avenues, span the community’s suburban/rural interface and can also be considered scenic corridors under the Open Space and Conservation Element. These roadways provide a scenic and character transition through the nearly built-out core of Central Clovis into its pastoral agrarian areas to the north, east, and south. Segments of these roadways in the Sphere of Influence are in transition from agrarian to urban.
354
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-3 Of the roadways discussed above, Shepherd Avenue is located immediately south of the Project site and is developed to urban standards with few exceptions from Friant Rd to the west to the intersection of St. Rt. 168 to the east. Specifically, the General Plan EIR identifies views of the rolling grassy hills near the Friant-Kern Canal, pastoral agrarian areas, and the Sierra Nevada foothills to the east from the Shepherd Avenue corridor to be highly valued by visitors and residents of Clovis should be preserved and protected.

LIGHT AND GLARE
During the day, sunlight reflecting from structures is a primary source of glare, while nighttime light and glare can be divided into both stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources of nighttime light include structure illumination, interior lighting, decorative landscape lighting, and streetlights.

The principal mobile source of nighttime light and glare is vehicle headlamp illumination. This ambient light environment can be accentuated during periods of low clouds or fog.

The variety of urban land uses in the City of Clovis are the main source of daytime and nighttime light and glare. They are typified by single and multi-family residences, commercial structures, industrial areas, and streetlights. These areas and their associated human activities (inclusive of vehicular traffic) characterize the existing light and glare environment present during daytime and nighttime hours in the urbanized portions of the City. Sources of light and glare in the City of Clovis include building (interior and exterior), security, sign illumination, and parking-area lighting. Other sources of nighttime light and glare include streetlights and vehicular traffic along surrounding roadways. Additionally, The General Plan EIR (page 5.1-10) notes that there is a significant amount of ambient lighting comes from surrounding communities and roadways. Because the City of Clovis is adjacent to highly urbanized portions of the City of Fresno to the west and south, ambient light in the community is substantially impacted by land uses in Fresno. Large, light-intensive institutions and facilities near the City’s boundary include Fresno Yosemite International Airport and CSU Fresno.

Nevertheless, areas within the City Limits and SOI, which account for nearly half of the entire Planning Area of the City of Clovis, are mainly rural residential and agricultural land and have very few sources of light and glare, allowing for clear day and nighttime views. This is the case of the Project site given that it is in the northern portion of Clovis, which is distant from the more urban and densely populated areas of Fresno and Clovis.

Sources of glare in urbanized portions of the City come from light reflecting off surfaces, including glass, and certain siding and paving materials, as well as metal roofing. The urbanized areas of Clovis contain sidewalks and paved parking areas which reflect street and vehicle lights. The existing light environment found in the Project site is considered typical of suburban areas.

Sky glow is the effect created by light reflecting into the night sky. Sky glow is of particular concern in areas surrounding observatories, where darker night sky conditions are necessary, but is also of concern in more rural or natural areas where a darker night sky is either the norm or is important to wildlife. Due to the urban nature of the City limits, a number of existing light sources affect residential areas and illuminate the night sky. Isolating impacts of particular sources of light or glare is therefore not appropriate or feasible for the proposed Project. 355
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

VISUAL CHARACTER AND SCENIC RESOURCES
Visual Character
The City of Clovis is in California’s San Joaquin Valley, and like most communities in the region, features a flat landscape organized around an orthogonal system of roadways. Due to its rapid growth in recent years and its adjacency to the City of Fresno, Clovis has a largely suburban character. A majority of the City’s land area is devoted to low density residential neighborhoods.

However, because the community has grown from a small farming town and is still surrounded by agricultural land uses on three sides, it retains a rural atmosphere. The suburban/rural interface is most prominent on the City’s eastern, southeastern, and southern edges. In these locations, new housing subdivisions are sited between working farms and large residential estate lots of two to five acres. The SOI beyond the City’s Limits to the east, northeast, and north is dominated by agricultural uses and undeveloped open spaces. The Project site is located in the north, and the immediately surrounded area is best characterized as a mix of agricultural, suburban residential, and large estate lots with existing residences.

Other Scenic Resources Areas
The foothills and the mountains of the Sierra include a scenic backdrop for the City. The Sierra Nevada also provides a broad array of recreational opportunities to residents of Clovis and is directly accessible from the City via SR-168 or the “Sierra Freeway,” which is a limited access roadway in urbanized Fresno and Clovis that bisects the City of Clovis. Natural resources in the Sierra Nevada foothills near Clovis include Millerton Lake State Recreation Area 14 miles to the north and Pine Flat Lake 30 miles to the east. The City itself contains no substantial, undeveloped natural resources other than the grasslands in its northeastern quadrant, north of Shepherd Avenue and Tollhouse Road/SR-168. Outside of this area, there are only remnants of native habitats and vegetation communities. However, irrigation canals throughout the City provide a scenic quality to the rural character of the region. Clovis also features numerous improved parks and green space areas that offer greenery and recreational opportunities to residents, such as the botanical gardens and a network of multipurpose trails. These open spaces also provide visual buffers that break up the monotony of the built environment.

Rolling grassy hills are in the City’s northeastern quadrant, north of Shepherd Avenue and Tollhouse Road/SR-168 near the Friant-Kern Canal. These hills are outside the City and SOI boundaries. Grade separations along the Sierra Highway (SR-168), generally located at major interchanges, create some artificial changes in topography that offer limited views of the Sierra Nevada to the east. However, the remainder of the Clovis area is relatively flat and provides clear views of the Sierra Nevada.

Agricultural lands have become important visual resources that contribute to the community identity of Clovis, and the Central Valley region. Agricultural lands provide for visual relief form urbanized areas and act as community separators to nearby urban areas. 356
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-5

PROJECT SITE
The Project site includes several distinct planning boundaries. The following terms are used throughout this document to describe planning area boundaries within the Project site:
• Project Area – Includes the whole of the Project site (approximately 155 acres), encompassing the approximate 77-acre Development Area and the approximate 78-acre Non-Development Area.
o Development Area - Includes the parcels being annexed that will be entitled for subdivision and development. This will include a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Pre-zone, Annexation/Reorganization, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, and Residential Site Plan Review.
o Non-Development Area - Includes the parcels being included in the SOI expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development. This includes two separate areas, each described as an Expansion SubArea. The two Expansion SubAreas total 78 acres and are defined as Expansion SubArea North and Expansion SubArea East.

The Development Area primarily contains farmland (orchard). Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use.

Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the east-west centerline of the area, one located in the southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area, and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foot-tall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the east-west centerline of the area, one located in the southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foot-tall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Expansion SubArea North: Includes single-family residences that are accessed by North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue. North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue are unimproved roadways with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping.

North Sunnyside Avenue located to the west and Perrin Road to the north are also unimproved County roadways. There are 18 APNs in SubArea North. • Expansion SubArea East: Includes single-family residences located between the Project site and North Fowler Avenue. North Fowler Avenue is a two-lane unimproved County roadway with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. There are 18 APNs in SubArea East.

The Project site is surrounded by a variety of residential land uses. Uses immediately adjacent to the north and east boundary of the Project site include rural residential uses on larger lots, some having small orchards. Rural residential parcels have no required standards for uniform or complimentary landscaping. As such, Rural Residential developments have a mixture of highly manicured landscaping to little or no formal landscaping. Simply, the Rural Residential areas do not have landscaping which creates a wide spectrum of aesthetically pleasing landscape themes to unattractive unkept with little or no aesthetic value.

Uses to the south of the Project site contain a mix of residential uses, as well as rural residential on larger lots and medium-high density residential in a developed smaller lot residential subdivision.

West of the Project site is an electrical power substation and a graded area that is being prepared for additional residential development.

There are minimal existing light sources on and adjacent to the Project site. Light sources are limited to the existing residential homes, roadway, and accessory agricultural structures adjacent to the Project Site.

The project site is located between the Northwest and the Northeast Urban Center area of the City of Clovis. The Northeast Urban Center area is mainly undeveloped and used primarily for agricultural and rural residential uses. The City of Clovis General Plan notes that the Northeast Urban Center is also relatively flat and offers the most direct and unobstructed views of the Sierra Nevada and foothills toward the northeast along State Route (SR)-168. The Northwest Urban center is currently urbanizing at a rapid pace, as intended by the General Plan.

Lastly, as noted before, the General Plan EIR identifies Shepherd Avenue as a scenic corridor, specifically referring to views of the rolling grassy hills near the Friant-Kern Canal, pastoral agrarian areas to the north, and the Sierra Nevada foothills to the east. Shepherd Avenue runs directly across the south boundary of the project site, however, the highest scenic qualities along Shepherd Avenue occur to the east of the Project site in the areas that are largely undeveloped with residences. It is noted that the General Plan EIR concluded that adoption of the General Plan, which contemplated urbanization of the agricultural lands within the General Plan study area, was a less than significant environmental impact.
358
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-7

3.1.2 REGULATORY SETTING
STATE
California Scenic Highway Program
The intent of the California Scenic Highway Program is “to protect and enhance California’s natural scenic beauty and to protect the social and economic values provided by the State’s scenic resources.” Caltrans administers the program, which was established in 1963 and is governed by the California Streets and Highways Code §260 et seq. The goal of the program is to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from changes that would diminish the aesthetic value of the adjacent land.

Caltrans has compiled a list of state highways that are designated as scenic and county highways that are officially designated or eligible for designation as scenic. Scenic highway designation can provide several types of benefits to the region. Scenic areas are protected from encroachment of inappropriate land uses, free of billboards, and are generally required to maintain existing contours and preserve important vegetative features. Only low-density development is allowed on steep slopes and along ridgelines on scenic highways, and noise setbacks are required for residential development.

To obtain an official “Scenic Highway” designation, the State and Caltrans require a responsible local agency or Local Governing Body (LGB) to prepare a scenic corridor protection plan. In the Clovis area, Fresno County is the LGB. Corridor protection programs are required to contain the following five elements, which have been included in the Fresno County’s policies:
● Regulations of land use and density of development;
● Detailed land and site planning;
● Control of outdoor advertising;
● Careful attention to and control of earthmoving and landscaping; and ● The design and appearance of structures and equipment.1 According to the Caltrans Scenic Highway Programs website, Caltrans monitors state-designated scenic routes in order to ensure each local jurisdiction’s consistency with State guidelines.

Specifically, Caltrans District Scenic Highway Coordinator (DSHC) will review a scenic highway for compliance every five years, but can recommend the revocation of scenic designation at any time.

To enforce the program, the DSHC will contact the responsible local agency or LGB, in this case, Fresno County. The LGB must either respond by submitting its current Corridor Protection Program or a letter of intent to request a revocation of the scenic designation. The DSHC reviews the 1 Scenic Highways Program website, List of eligible and officially designated State Scenic Highways (XLSX), https:// Scenic Highways | Caltrans, accessed on February 9, 2021.
359
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North submittal and takes corrective action to resolve any issues of non-compliance, certifies compliance, or recommends revocation of scenic designation.

LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes several policies that are relevant to an evaluation of the visual quality of the Project site. The General Plan policies applicable to the Project are identified below:

Policies: Land Use Element
● LU-Policy 3.6. Mix of housing types and sizes. Development is encouraged to provide a mix of housing types, unit sizes, and densities at the block level. To accomplish this, individual projects five acres or larger may be developed at densities equivalent to one designation higher or lower than the assigned designation, provided that the density across an individual project remains consistent with the General Plan.
● LU-Policy 4.3. Future environmental clearance. The city shall monitor development and plan for additional environmental clearance as development levels approach those evaluated in the General Plan EIR.
● LU-Policy 4.4. Farmland conservation. Participate in regional farmland conservation, including the establishment of comprehensive agricultural preserves or easements, through efforts such as the Fresno County Model Farmland Conservation Program or the San Joaquin Valley Greenprint.

Policies: Circulation Element
● CIR-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.
● CIR-Policy 3.11 Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and right-ofways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage nonmotorized transportation. ● CIR-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.
● CIR-Policy 5.3 Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.

Policies: Open Space and Conservation Element
● OSC-Policy 1.1 Parkland standard. Provide a minimum of 4 acres of public parkland for every 1,000 residents.
360
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-9 ● OSC-Policy 1.3. New parks and recreation facilities. Provide a variety of parks and recreation facilities in underserved and growing areas of the community. ● OSC-Policy 1.5. Multipurpose open space. Design public facilities as multipurpose open space and recreation to serve the community’s infrastructure needs while preserving and enhancing open space and water features. Prioritize the use of existing basins for existing areas, and for future areas prioritize the development of separate park facilities available year round.
● OSC-Policy 2.2. New development. Encourage new development to incorporate on-site natural resources and low impact development techniques. ● OSC-Policy 2.3. Visual resources. Maintain public views of open spaces, parks, and natural features. Enhance views along roadways and trails. Preserve Clovis’ viewshed of the surrounding foothills and orient new development to capitalize on views of the Sierra Nevada.
● OSC-Policy 3.4. Drought-tolerant landscaping. Promote water conservation through the use of drought-tolerant landscaping on existing and new residential properties. Require drought-tolerant landscaping for all new commercial and industrial development and citymaintained landscaping, unless used for recreation purposes.

City of Clovis Zoning Ordinance
Chapter 9.28 Landscaping Standards, of the City Development Code contains standards and provisions related to landscaping design requirements that would apply to the proposed Project.

The primary intent of Chapter 9.28 Landscaping Standards, is to enhance the appearance of all development by providing standards relating to the quality, quantity, and functional aspects of landscaping and landscape screening; protect public health, safety, and welfare by minimizing the impact of all forms of physical and visual pollution, controlling soil erosion, screening incompatible land uses, preserving the integrity of existing residential neighborhoods, and enhancing pedestrian and vehicular traffic and safety; and decrease the use of water for landscaping purposes by requiring the efficient use of irrigation, appropriate plant materials, and regular maintenance of landscaped areas.

Section 9.22.050 of the Clovis Development Code contains standards and provisions related to exterior lighting, which requires that light be shielded so that light does not spill onto adjacent properties; are architecturally integrated with the character of on-site and adjacent structures; and incorporate appropriate height, intensity, and scale to the uses they are serving.

3.1.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on aesthetics if it will:
361
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
• Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway; • 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; and/or
• Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

The evaluation of aesthetics and aesthetic impacts is highly subjective, yet it requires the application of a process that objectively identifies the visual features of the existing environment and their importance. The characterization of aesthetics involves establishing existing visual character, including resources and scenic vistas unique to the Project site and vicinity. Visual resources are determined by identifying existing landforms (e.g. topography and grading), views (e.g. scenic resources such as natural features or urban characteristics), viewing points/locations, and existing light and glare (e.g. nighttime illumination). Changes to the existing aesthetic environment that would result due to implementation of the proposed Project are identified and qualitatively evaluated based on the proposed modifications to the existing setting and the viewer’s sensitivity.

Project-related impacts are compared to the context of the existing setting, using the thresholds listed above. The following impact analysis addresses thresholds of significance.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.1-1: Project implementation may result in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas and resources or substantial degradation of visual character. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Project involves the expansion of the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) to add approximately 155 acres into the City of Clovis’ SOI, including the annexation/reorganization of the proposed 77-acre Development Area to develop 605 single-family detached units, open space totaling 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks, and associated roadway improvements. As mentioned previously, the nonDevelopment Area includes the parcels being included in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development and no new development or improvements are proposed as part of this proposed Project for the Non-development Area. Therefore, the existing visual character of the Non-development Area would not change as part of this proposed Project.

Development of the proposed Project would convert the 77-acre Development Area from its existing use as primarily agricultural land (pecan orchard) to a residential neighborhood. The neighborhoods within the Development Area would include a network of streets to provide an efficient flow of 362
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-11 traffic through the area. Other uses to support and compliment the proposed residential development include underground (non-visible) wet and dry utility infrastructure, roadways with curb/gutters/sidewalks, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, street lighting, and street signage.

The Project site is not designated as a scenic vista by the City of Clovis General Plan or the Fresno County General Plan, nor does it contain any unique or distinguishing features that would qualify the site for designation as a scenic vista. However, the City’s General Plan EIR considers Shepherd Avenue a scenic corridor under the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element. The City’s General Plan EIR notes that new development will impact current views of open space, which are primarily vistas of agricultural fields and orchards. These public views are primarily available to motorists traveling along roadways which bound the Development Area. Implementation of the proposed Project would change the existing visual character of the Development Area from a primarily agricultural site to a developed suburban neighborhood. These impacts related to a change in visual character may be considered “attractive” to one viewer and “unattractive” to other viewers.

It is noted that the Clovis General Plan EIR concluded that adoption of the General plan which contemplated urbanization of the agricultural lands within the General Plan study area, was a less than significant environmental impact.

Policy 2.3 of the Clovis General Plan Update’s Open Space and Conservation Element gives substantial consideration to the preservation of scenic vistas, corridors, and scenic resources, such as maintaining public views of open spaces, parks, and natural features; enhancing views along roadways and trails; preserving Clovis’ viewshed of the surrounding foothills; and orienting new development to capitalize on views of the Sierra Nevada. Chapter 9 of the Clovis Development Code also establishes requirements for fences, walls, and hedges to ensure that these elements minimize screening of scenic views and sunlight by outlining provisions such as height limitations, design and construction materials, site plan review requirements, allowable fencing materials, etc. per Section

9.24.060 (Fences, Walls, and Hedges); and screening and buffering requirements of adjoining land uses, utility equipment, and refuse areas are detailed in Section 9.24.090 (Screening and Buffering).

Development in accordance to these code requirements would ensure that the implantation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse impact on scenic vistas, corridors, or resources in the City of Clovis.

The Project site currently consists primarily of agricultural lands, primarily a pecan orchard that is currently being removed due to the tree mortality, the agricultural land provides visual relief from urban and suburban developments, and helps to define the character of a region. The proposed Project would develop the last remaining property in agricultural use in an area surrounded by urban and Rural Residential uses. Supporting infrastructure would be extended to the area, which would result in the permanent loss of these agricultural uses. Under some circumstances, loss of agricultural lands could have an adverse cumulative impact on the overall visual character and quality of a region. As noted above, however, the pecan orchard portion of the Project site is an island of agricultural land use surrounded by developed homes to the east, north, and south, and an entitled residential subdivision to the west. What this means is that the pecan orchard is a relic agricultural piece of property that has remained intact and operational despite the properties in the 363
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North immediate surrounding aesthetically changing to suburban residential aesthetic. The proposed Project would change the existing aesthetic of the Project site to be consistent with the urban landscaping theme established for Shepherd Avenue by the City of Fresno and its urban projects as well as the City of Clovis and its urban projects that generally continues that urban landscaping theme along Shepherd Avenue. With few exceptions, both cities have required residential projects to construct a uniform 6 ft. tall concrete block wall setback at least 30 feet from the street with landscaping, sidewalks and bike lanes. Trees of a small to medium size and a variety of shrubs create a generally consistent shared landscape theme by both cities.

In addition, a change in the visual character of a project site does not necessarily mean the visual character of the project site or the surrounding area will be degraded. The Project applicant has submitted a conceptual plan for the project detailing the Shepherd Avenue and open space landscaping for the proposed developed prepared by a licensed landscape architect. That conceptual landscape plan includes visual components that will enhance the appearance of the neighborhood once developed similar to those constructed by adjacent residential projects along Shepherd Avenue. These improvements include landscaping improvements like new street trees and other neighborhood greenery along Shepherd and Sunnyside Street frontages of the Project.

The proposed Project would also result in the construction of park and open space areas which provides some visual relief within residential subdivisions. While implementation of the proposed Project would change the existing visual character of the area, the development components of the subdivisions are in alignment with the City’s requirements for residential subdivisions in the region.

To reduce the visual impact of the development, development within the Project site is required to be consistent with the General Plan and the Clovis Zoning Ordinance, as described above, which includes design standards. The City of Clovis zoning ordinance and ministerial permits design, construction and maintenance standards will ensure quality and cohesive design of the Project site.

These standards include specifications for building height, massing, and orientation, exterior lighting standards, and landscaping standards. Following the City’s design, construction, and maintenance requirements will produce a project that will be internally cohesive, while maintaining and aesthetic feel similar to that of the surrounding urban uses.

The loss of the visual appearance of the agricultural land on the site will change the visual character of the Project site in perpetuity, which some people are expected to view as a loss of an isolated visually attractive amenity. Compliance with the requirements within the General Plan, as well as the Municipal Code (specifically Title 7 Public Works, Title 8 Building Regulations, Title 9 Development Code, and Title 10 Parks and Recreation), for the design, construction, and maintenance of the project will be required. Title 9 Development Code Division 3 includes a series of Development and Operational Standards that are aimed at creating uniform performance standards which are designed to minimize and mitigate the potential impacts of development within the City and promote compatibility with surrounding areas and land uses. These standards cover topics such as exterior light and glare (Section 9.22.050), fences, walls, and hedges (Section

9.24.060), height measure and height limit exceptions (9.24.080), screening and buffering (Section

9.24.090), setback regulations and exceptions (Section 9.24.100), landscaping standards (Chapter 364
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-13

9.28), tree protection standards (Chapter 9.30), and signs (Chapter 9.34). Some of these standards and requirements from pre-existing regulations are implemented after Project entitlement when more detailed site planning, engineering, and architecture is performed. The final approval of these items is ministerial. Some examples of requirements that the Project will follow are:

1. The Project will be required to submit and obtain approval form the City of Clovis of a comprehensive landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect that is in substantial conformity with the submitted project conceptual landscaping plan, entry treatment and park improvements. The City of Clovis ministerial permits for landscaping, irrigation and grading will assure said landscaping and irrigation complies with applicable state and local plant type and irrigation and grading standards.

2. The Project will be required to annex into a City of Clovis landscaping lighting and maintenance district (LLMD) that will assure that all landscaping and lighting within the public easements along Shepherd and Sunnyside Avenues are properly maintained in manner acceptable to the City of Clovis.

3. The Project will form a common interest association for the purpose of, among other things, common area maintenance. Said maintenance will be at the Project owner’s expense. The common interest association will be subject to California Department of Real Estate operational and financial surety requirements.

4. Each Project lot will be subject to the City of Clovis requirement that a Site Plan Review be submitted and approved by the City of Clovis. The Site Plan Review process will require, among other things, that all lots meet applicable development standards; share a compatible architectural, landscaping and color scheme and conform to mandatory grading and drainage standards.

The Municipal Code implements the policies of the Clovis General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City of Clovis. The Municipal Code is adopted to protect and to promote the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of residents and businesses in the City. These existing requirements provide standards for the orderly growth and development of the City to establish and maintain the community’s history and quality characteristics in appropriate locations. It requires high quality planning and design for development that enhances the visual character of the City, avoids conflicts between land uses, encourages the appropriate mix of uses, and preserves the scenic qualities of the City. It also creates a comprehensive and stable pattern of land uses upon which to plan sewerage, transportation, water supply, and other public facilities and utilities. Overall, these mandatory requirements are deemed effective in reducing potential visual impacts. This is particularly true here where the project site is an isolated and remnant agricultural use surrounded by residential and rural residential land uses.

Therefore, the Project’s potential to adversely impact aesthetics is considered less than significant.

Impact 3.1-2: Project implementation may substantially damage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. (Less than Significant) There are no designated State Scenic Highways in the vicinity of the Project site. No officially designated State scenic highways are located in the City of Clovis. The nearest eligible State scenic 365
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North highway to the City is State Route 168, which is located in Fresno County northeast of the City of Clovis. The City of Clovis and the Project site are not visible from this roadway segment. Additionally, there are no “eligible” highway segments in the Project vicinity that may be included in the State Scenic Highway system. As such, this is a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.1-3: Project implementation may result in light and glare impacts. (Less than Significant)
As noted in Impact 3.1-1, the proposed Project involves the development of up to 605 single-family residential units, open space totaling approximately 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks, and associated roadway improvements. New sources of glare would occur primarily from the windshields of vehicles travelling to and from the Development Area and from vehicles parked within the Project site.

However, parking for the proposed residential uses in the Development Area would primarily occur within enclosed garages and driveways. Headlights and windshields would be shielded by the proposed residential structures within the site. Additionally, the Project includes plans for extensive landscaping and open space areas throughout the site, which would provide visual screening and block potential windshield glare for sensitive receptors within the Project site. Residential structures placed along the boundaries of the Development Area would provide visual screening and block potential windshield glare to areas surrounding the Project site.

Additionally, several roadways would be constructed within the Development Area to serve the proposed single-family residential uses. These roadways would result in the introduction of street lighting into a currently undeveloped site. However, the proposed single-family residential uses and local roadway would be typical of what is already experienced as a result of the existing single-family residential uses and local roadways that occur within the surrounding area. The proposed singlefamily residential uses would be an extension of single-family residential uses adjacent to the Project site.

The proposed Project would be required to implement existing City regulations aimed at reducing light and glare impacts to ensure that no unusual daytime glare or nighttime lighting is produced.

Specifically, the Clovis Development Code states that direct glare shall not be permitted and provides standards for nuisance prevention and shielding requirements. Section 9.22.050 of the Clovis Development Code contains standards and provisions related to exterior lighting. While implementation of regulations and standards within the Clovis Development Code would reduce impacts associated with increased light and glare, the impacts would not be eliminated entirely, and the overall level of light and glare in the Project site would increase in general as urban development occurs.

Overall, the proposed Project would introduce new sources of daytime and nighttime lighting within the Project site that do not currently exist. However, it is noted there are no specific features within the proposed Project that would create unusual light and glare. Light sources from the proposed Project can have an adverse impact on the surrounding areas, by introducing nuisance light into the area and decreasing the visibility of nighttime skies. Additionally, light sources can create light 366
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES 3.1
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.1-15 spillover impacts on surrounding land uses in the absence of a lighting plan that includes photometrics of the lighting. Any new lighting associated with implementation of the proposed Project would be pedestrian-scale lighting and the fixtures would be consistent with the style and technical specifications approved by the City, including compliance with the City’s light and glare regulations under Section 9.22.050 of the Clovis Development Code, which requires that light be shielded so that light does not spill onto adjacent properties. The City’s existing requirements require a lighting plan to be submitted to the City for review and approval for the improvement plans, as well as for the building plans. All proposed outdoor lighting is required to meet applicable City standards regulating outdoor lighting, including 9.22.050 Exterior light and glare of the City’s Development code, in order to minimize any impacts resulting from outdoor lighting on adjacent properties. Implementation of the existing City standards would reduce potential impacts associated with nighttime lighting and light spillage onto adjacent properties to a less than significant level. 367
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.1 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES TITLE]

3.1-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
368
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-1 This section provides an overview of agricultural resources in Fresno County and the City of Clovis, agricultural capability of the soils on the Project site, and existing site conditions. This section concludes with an evaluation of the impacts related to agricultural resources and recommendations for mitigating impacts as needed. Information in this section is derived primarily from:
• City of Clovis General Plan (City of Clovis, August 2014); • Clovis General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (City of Clovis, June 2014); • California Important Farmlands Map (California Department of Conservation, 2022); • California Land Conservation (Williamson) Act Status Report (California Department of Conservation, 2021;
• Fresno County Crop Report (Fresno County Department of Agriculture, 2021); • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2022); • A Landscape of Choice – Strategies for improving patterns of Community Growth (April 1998); and
• Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed Tract 6205 (Spensley Property) Sunnyside and Shepherd Avenues Clovis, California (Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2019) (Appendix F).

It is noted that there are no forest resources located on the Project site or in the City of Clovis, thus this CEQA topic is not relevant to the proposed Project and will not be addressed further in this EIR.

There was one comment received from the California Department of Conservation during the NOP scoping process related to this environmental topic. The comment is included as an appendix to this report and is addressed in part by the contents of this section.

3.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

FRESNO COUNTY AGRICULTURE
Fresno County occupies a central location in California’s vast agricultural heartland, the San Joaquin Valley. The County’s Agricultural Commissioner’s most recent published Agricultural Report (2021) contains the following information relating to agriculture in the County.

Agricultural Value
The gross value of agricultural production in Fresno County for 2021 was $8,085,567,000 which represents an increase of $117,167,000 or 1.47% above the previous year's revised total of $7,968,400,000. Table 3.2-1 lists the nine primary commodities in Fresno County in 2020 and 2021.

TABLE 3.2-1: SUMMARY COMPARISON OF CROP VALUES
PRODUCT TYPE 2020 VALUE IN DOLLARS 2021 VALUE IN DOLLARS Field Crops $299,961,000 $369,792,000
Vegetable Crops $1,418,639,000 $1,219,120,000
Fruit and Nut Crops $4,561,749,000 $4,793,849,000
Nursery Products $39,201,000 $47,941,000
Livestock and Poultry $1,022,018,000 $990,996,000
Livestock and Poultry Products $473,272,000 $500,528,000 369
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North PRODUCT TYPE 2020 VALUE IN DOLLARS 2021 VALUE IN DOLLARS Seed Crops $8,812,000 $24,151,000
Apiary Products $141,505,000 $133,585,000
Other Products (Industrial Crops) $3,243,000 $5,605,000 SOURCE: FRESNO COUNTY AGRICULTURAL REPORT, 2021.

AGRICULTURAL CAPABILITY
The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program identifies lands that have agriculture value and maintains a statewide map of these lands called the Important Farmlands Inventory (IFI). IFI classifies land based upon the productive capabilities of the land, rather than the mere presence of ideal soil conditions.

The suitability of soils for agricultural use is just one factor for determining the productive capabilities of land. Suitability is determined based on many characteristics, including fertility, slope, texture, drainage, depth, and salt content. A variety of classification systems have been devised by the State to categorize soil capabilities. The two most widely used systems are the Capability Classification System and the Storie Index. The Capability Classification System classifies soils from Class I to Class VIII based on their ability to support agriculture with Class I being the highest quality soil. The Storie Index considers other factors such as slope and texture to arrive at a rating. The IFI is in part based upon both of these two classification systems.

Soil Capability Classification System
The Soil Capability Classification System takes into consideration soil limitations, the risk of damage when soils are used, and the way in which soils respond to treatment. Capability classes range from Class I soils, which have few limitations for agriculture, to Class VIII soils that are unsuitable for agriculture. Generally, as the rating of the capability classification increases, yields and profits are more difficult to obtain. A general description of soil classifications, as defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is provided in Table 3.2-2 below.

TABLE 3.2-2: SOIL CAPABILITY CLASSIFICATION

CLASS DEFINITION
I Soils have slight limitations that restrict their use.

II Soils have moderate limitations that restrict choice plants or that require moderate conservation practices.

III Soils have severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants or that require special conservation practices, or both.

IV Soils have very severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants or that require very careful management, or both.

V Soils are not likely to erode, but have other limitations; impractical to remove that limits their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VI Soils have severe limitations that make them generally unsuited to cultivation and limit their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VII Soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VIII Soils and landforms have limitations that preclude their use for commercial plans and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife habitat, water supply, or aesthetic purposes.

SOURCE: USDA SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE.
370
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-3 Storie Index Rating System
The Storie Index Rating system ranks soil characteristics according to their suitability for agriculture from Grade 1 soils (80 to 100 rating) which have few or no limitations for agricultural production, to Grade 6 soils (less than 10) which are not suitable for agriculture. Under this system, soils deemed less than prime can function as prime soils when limitations such as poor drainage, slopes, or soil nutrient deficiencies are partially or entirely removed. The six grades, ranges in index rating, and definition of the grades, as defined by the NRCS, are provided below in Table 3.2-3.

TABLE 3.2-3: STORIE INDEX RATING SYSTEM

GRADE INDEX RATING DEFINITION
1 80 – 100 Few limitations that restrict their use for crops 2 60 – 80 Suitable for most crops, but have minor limitations that narrow the choice of crops and have a few special management needs 3 40 – 60 Suited to a few crops or to special crops and require special management
4 20 – 40 If used for crops, severely limited and require special management 5 10 – 20 Not suited for cultivated crops, but can be used for pasture and range 6 Less than 10 Soil and land types generally not suited to farming SOURCE: NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY, 2019.

In addition to soil suitability, other factors for determining the agricultural value of land include whether soils are irrigated, the depth of soil, water-holding capacity, and physical and chemical characteristics. Areas considered to have the greatest agricultural potential are designated as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.

Important Farmlands
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) is a farmland classification system administered by the California Department of Conservation. Important farmland maps are based on the Land Inventory and Monitoring criteria, which classify a land’s suitability for agricultural production based on both the physical and chemical characteristics of soils, and the actual land use.

The system maps five categories of agricultural land, which include important farmlands (prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, and farmland of local importance) and grazing land, as well as three categories of non-agricultural land, which include urban and builtup land, other land, and water area.

IMPORTANT FARMLANDS IN FRESNO COUNTY
Data from the Department of Conservation indicates that approximately 1,858 acres of Prime Farmland in the County were developed for other uses between 2016 and 2018, resulting in an existing total of 381,934 acres of Prime Farmland (42 percent of agricultural land). The remaining agricultural land is comprised of Farmland of Statewide Importance (9 percent), Unique Farmland (9 percent), Farmland of Local Importance (7 percent), and Grazing Land (14 percent). The types and acreages of farmland in 2016 and 2018 are shown in Table 3.2-4. 371
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North TABLE 3.2-4: FRESNO COUNTY FARMLANDS SUMMARY AND CHANGE BY LAND USE CATEGORY

LAND USE CATEGORY
2016-2018 ACREAGE CHANGES

TOTAL ACREAGE INVENTORIED

ACRES ACRES TOTAL NET

LOST GAINED ACREAGE

CHANGED

ACREAGE

CHANGED
2016 2018 (-) (+) Acres Percent Acres Percent
Prime Farmland 675,720 28% 672,208 28% 7,237 3,725 10,962 -3,512 Farmland of
Statewide
Importance
397,133
16%
395,148
16%
3,945 1,960 5,905 -1,985
Unique Farmland 94,902 4% 95,352 4% 809 1,259 2,068 450 Farmland of Local
Importance 191,783 8% 192,434 8% 9,946 10,597 20,543 651

IMPORTANT

FARMLAND

SUBTOTAL
1,359,538
56%
1,355,142
56%
21,937 17,541 39,478 -4,396
Grazing Land 822,696 34% 822,455 34% 718 477 1,195 -241

AGRICULTURAL
LAND SUBTOTAL 2,182,234 90% 2,177,597 89% 22,655 18,018 40,673 -4,637 Urban and Built-up
Land 128,910 5% 132,868 5% 685 4,643 5,328 3,958
Other Land 121,445 5% 121,847 5% 1,745 2,211 3,956 466
Water Area 4,908 <1% 5,121 <1% 64 277 341 213

TOTAL AREA
INVENTORIED 2,437,497 100% 2,437,433 100% 25,149 25,149 50,298 0 SOURCE: CA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCE PROTECTION TABLE A-30, 2018.

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The Development Area primarily contains farmland (orchard). Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use.

The Non-Development Area is located within the City of Clovis’ Planning Area, but is outside of the City’s existing Sphere of Influence and contains existing single-family residences. Each SubArea is uniquely different and is described below:
• Expansion SubArea North: Includes single-family residences that are accessed by North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue. North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue are unimproved roadways with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. North Sunnyside Avenue located to the west and Perrin 372
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-5 Road to the north are also unimproved County roadways. There are 18 APNs in SubArea North.
• Expansion SubArea East: Includes single-family residences located between the Project site and North Fowler Avenue. North Fowler Avenue is a two-lane unimproved County roadway with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. There are 18 APNs in SubArea East.

Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is surrounded by a variety of residential land uses. Uses immediately adjacent to the north and east boundary of the Project site include rural residential uses on larger lots. Uses to the south of the Project site contain a mix of residential uses, as well as rural residential on larger lots and medium-high density residential in a developed smaller lot residential subdivision. West of the Project site are single family residential subdivisions under construction and a power sub-station.

Project Site Farmland Characteristics
The State of California Department of Conservation FMMP and Fresno County GIS data were used to illustrate the farmland designations for the Project site. The last mapping date in Fresno County is June 2020. Farmlands on the Project site are identified in Figure 3.2-1. The farmland classifications for the site and surrounding area are described below. It is important to note that the California Department of Conservation notes on the map that “This map should be used within the limits of its purpose - as a current inventory of agricultural land resources. This map does not necessarily reflect general plan or zoning designations, city limit lines, changing economic or market conditions, or other factors which may be taken into consideration when land use policies are determined. This map is not designed for parcel-specific planning purposes due to its scale and the ten-acre minimum land use mapping unit. Classification of important farmland and urban areas on this map is based on best available data. The information has been delineated as accurately as possible at 1:24,000- scale, but no claim to meet 1:24,000 National Map Accuracy Standards is made due to variations in the quality of source data.”

PRIME FARMLAND
Prime Farmland is farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

According to the June 2020 Important Farmland Map, approximately 63.73 acres of Prime Farmland are in the Project Site with approximately 63.60 acres of the Prime Farmland in the Development Area. Prime Farmland is also shown immediately west of the Project Site. This designation, however, does not fully consider site specific characteristics such as the existence of a hardpan within the upper horizon of the soil profile, the project size, surrounding urban uses, lack of agricultural protection zones in the zone of influence, lack of water resources, and ongoing economic feasibility 373
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North of agricultural operations due to other factors. The LESA model shows that the loss of this land does not exceed the threshold of significance, which suggests that the 2020 Important Farmland Map designating the Project site as Prime farmland is not justified for the site-specific conditions. The results of the LESA Model are included as Appendix B, and are discussed more in the Impact Analysis.

FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE
Farmland of Statewide Importance is farmland with characteristics similar to those of Prime Farmland, but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture.

Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

Approximately 11.47 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance are in the Project Site with approximately 11.44 acres of the Farmland of Statewide Importance in the Development Area.

Similar to what was discuss under the Prime Farmland discussion above, this designation does not fully consider site specific characteristics. As previously explained, the LESA model shows that the loss of this land does not exceed the threshold of significance, which suggests that the 2020 Important Farmland Map designating the Project site as Farmland of Statewide Importance is not justified for the site-specific conditions. The results of the LESA Model are included as Appendix B, and are discussed more in the Impact Analysis.

UNIQUE FARMLAND
Unique Farmland is farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state's leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

There is no Unique Farmland within the Project site, or in the immediately vicinity, that is designated Unique Farmland.

FARMLAND OF LOCAL IMPORTANCE
Farmland of Local Importance is land of importance to the local agricultural economy, as determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee.

There is no Farmland of Local Importance located within the Project site. Farmland of Local Importance is located to the northwest of the Project site.

URBAN AND BUILT-UP LAND
Urban and Built-up Land is land occupied by structures with a building density of at least one (1) unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes.
374
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-7 Approximately 41.02 acres of Urban and Built-up Land are located on the Project site with approximately 1.68 acres located within the Development Area of the Project Site. Urban and Builtup Land is located to the north and south of the Project site.

RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND
Rural Residential Land has a building density of less than 1 structure per 1.5 acres, but with at least 1 structure per 10 acres.

Approximately 38.89 acres of Rural Residential land are located within the Project site with approximately 1.70 acres located within the Development Area of the Project Site.

OTHER LAND
Other Land is not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than forty (40) acres.

Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land.

Other Land is not located on the Project site or within the general vicinity of the Project as shown on Figure 3.2-1.

Soils and Farmland Characteristics
A Custom Soil Survey was completed for the Project site using the NRCS Web Soil Survey program.

Table 3.2-5 identifies the soils found in the Project area. The NRCS Soils Map is provided on Figure

3.2-2. In addition, a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation was performed by Krazan and Associates, Inc. on January 24, 2019, that further refined the soil conditions through physical drilling and testing. This report essentially denotes that the majority of the property has a thin layer of productive soil, underlaid by a hardpan and perched water that is not conducive to sustained long term agricultural production.

TABLE 3.2-5: PROJECT SITE SOILS
MAP
UNIT
SYMBOL
NAME

ACRES IN

DEVELOPMENT
AREA

PERCENT OF

DEVELOPMENT
AREA

ACRES IN
NONDEVELOPMENT
AREA

PERCENT OF
NONDEVELOPMENT
AREA

CAPABILITY
CLASSIFICATION*
STORIE
INDEX
An Alamo clay 0.00 0.0% 0.27 0% IIIw-IVw 6
ArA
Atwater
sandy
loam, 0 to
3 percent
slopes

10.85 13.8% 16.21 21% IIs-IVs 93
Gf
Grangeville
fine sandy
loam, 0 to
1 percent
slopes

23.05 29.4% 8.49 11% IIw-IVw 30
375
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Gg
Grangeville
fine sandy
loam,
saline
alkali

3.36 4.3% 0.09 0% IIs-IVs 56
Re
Ramona
loam, hard
substratum

20.39 26.0% 30.92 40% IIs-IVs 48
Rh Riverwash 0.81 1.0% 0.04 0% VIII 25
SeA
San
Joaquin
loam, 0 to
3 percent
slopes

11.54 14.7% 12.62 16% IIIs-IVs 31
TzbA
Tujunga
loamy
sand, 0 to
3 percent
slopes

0.00 0.0% 1.86 2% IVs-IVs 65
VaA
Visalia
sandy
loam, 0 to
3 percent
slopes

8.42 10.7% 6.19 8% I-IVc 95
* DEPICTS IRRIGATED VS NON IRRIGATED CAPABILITY RATING
SOURCE: FRESNO COUNTY GIS, NRCS SOILS DATABASE, JULY 19, 2022.

Alamo clay. The Alamo series consists of moderately deep to hardpan, poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium from mixed sources. Alamo soils are in basins and drainageways on floodplains and fan remnants. Slope ranges from 0 to 2 percent.

Atwater sandy loam. The Atwater series consists of very deep, well drained soils formed in granitic alluvium. Soils are well drained with moderately rapid permeability and slow runoff. Used mainly for production of truck crops, grapes, tree fruits, nuts, grain, and alfalfa. Vegetation consists of annual grasses, weeds, and low-growing shrubs.

Grangeville fine sandy loam. The Grangeville series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in moderate coarse textured alluvium dominantly from granitic rock sources.

Grangeville soils are on alluvial fans and floodplains and have slopes ranging from 0 to 2 percent.

Somewhat poorly drained; this soil has altered drainage because of the dams and reservoirs in the Sierra Nevada, pumping from the water table, tile and interceptor drains, and filling and leveling of sloughs in the vicinity. Negligible to very low runoff; moderately rapid permeability and moderate permeability in saline-sodic phases. Used intensively for growing alfalfa, grapes, cotton, truck crops and irrigated pasture. Some areas are being urbanized. Vegetation in uncultivated areas is annual grasses and forbs with native (sodic) alkali-tolerant plants and a few scattered oak and cottonwood trees.
376
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-9 Ramona loam. The Ramona series is a member of the fine-loamy, mixed, thermic family of Typic Haploxeralfs. Typically, Ramona soils have brown, slightly and medium acid, sandy loam and fine sandy loam A horizons, reddish brown and yellowish red, slightly acid, sandy clay loam B2t horizons, and strong brown, neutral, fine sandy loam C horizons. Well-drained; slow to rapid runoff; moderately slow permeability. Used mostly for production of grain, grain-hay, pasture, irrigated citrus, olives, truck crops, and deciduous fruits. Uncultivated areas have a cover of annual grasses, forbs, chamise or chaparral.

Riverwash. Riverwash consists of the unvegetated sand bars in the main channel of rivers that are frequently flooded.

San Joaquin loam. The San Joaquin series consists of moderately deep to a duripan, well and moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from mixed, but dominantly granitic rock sources. They are on undulating low terraces with slopes of 0 to 9 percent. Well and moderately well drained; medium to very high runoff; very slow permeability. Some areas are subject to rare or occasional flooding. Used for cropland and livestock grazing; crops are small grains, irrigated pasture and rice; vineyards, fruit and nut crops.

Tujunga loamy sand. The Tujunga series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in alluvium from granitic sources. Tujunga soils are on alluvial fans and floodplains, including urban areas. Slopes range from 0 to 12 percent. This soil is used for grazing, citrus, grapes, other fruits, and urban residential or commercial development. Uncultivated areas have a cover of shrubs, annual grasses and forbs. In urban areas, ornamentals and turf-grass are common.

Visalia sandy loam. This series consists of well drained soils. They formed in alluvium derived from granite. Slopes range from 5 to 9 percent. Common uses for this series include irrigated cropland and this soil is considered Prime farmland, if irrigated.

Availability of Water Resources and Feasibility
For several years, the current property owner has been responsible for managing the former CalPecan orchard located on the Project site. In recent years, primarily due to drought conditions and expansion of new development surrounding the former Cal-Pecan orchard, the economically viable of irrigated agricultural production has diminished. The Project site is located entirely north and east of the Enterprise Canal and therefore outside of the nearby Fresno Irrigation District boundary. It is therefore not eligible to receive deliveries of surface water from any irrigation district. This is an entirely different situation from other properties located in the region, such as the nearby Heritage Grove growth area. A portion of Heritage Grove is located on the west side of the Enterprise Canal and continues to receive deliveries of surface water to support agricultural production. Recent SIGMA regulatory changes that now severely limit groundwater pumping has constrained the ability of any agricultural properties located outside of an irrigation district to support intensive agricultural uses that require regular and timely irrigation; further, groundwater pumping on this property has proven to be unpredictable and unreliable in recent years as available water from the aquifer under the Project site had been highly variable and provided an unreliable supply. The property owner has indicated that they made every effort to continue irrigating the trees throughout the drought 377
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North conditions last summer, but the wells on the Project site went entirely dry and caused the pumps to burn out. The pecan trees suffered tremendous damage without available irrigation water and it resulted in large-scale tree mortality.

Additionally, as a result of the recent SIGMA regulatory changes, virtually all agricultural lending banks and institutions have recently changed their lending requirements to now demand availability of two sources of water (groundwater and surface water) as a condition for continued lending. The Project site cannot meet the new lending requirement because it is located outside of an irrigation district and is no longer eligible to obtain agricultural loans to support commercial agricultural operations.

The property owner also has noted that the soil substructure varies greatly on the Project site and is not accurately reflected in the more generic soil types documented in the Soil Survey for the region. The property owner has indicated that the soils are not conducive to produce high agricultural yields because there is a cemented silty sand, clayey sand, and silty sand with clay, locally referred to as "hardpan" that is encountered below 2 feet across much of the Project site. This cementation retards the free percolation of surface water into the soil stratum below the hardpan, frequently resulting in a temporary perched water table condition at or near the ground surface during winter periods of precipitation. The perched water table can result in anerobic conditions in the root zone, which can result in root mortality and damage or death to the crop. This hardpan layer limits the types of crops that can be successful and is generally a variable that makes the property less economically viable for agricultural production.

The property owner has also indicated that the proximity of the Project site to existing urban development diminishes the economic viability of agricultural production. The property owner has indicated that there is increased vandalism, theft and harassment costs in recent years. The property owner cited last summer as particularly troublesome when neighbors would routinely shut-off irrigation pumps during the night and the valves in the orchard rows that are necessary to regulate pressure to operate the system were stolen. The property owner noted that equipment vandalism and theft occurred regularly and continued agricultural operations are now virtually impossible.

3.2.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL
Farmland Protection Policy Act
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) is intended to minimize the extent to which federal programs contribute to the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. It ensures that, to the extent practicable, federal programs are compatible with State and local units of government as well as private programs and policies to protect farmland. Projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to nonagricultural use and are completed by a federal agency or with assistance from a federal agency.

For the purpose of the FPPA, farmland includes Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Land of Statewide or Local Importance. Farmland subject to FPPA requirements does not have to be 378
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-11 currently used for crop production. In fact, the land can be forest land, pastureland, cropland, or other land, but does not include water bodies or land developed for urban land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, or industrial uses).

The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) administers the Farmland Protection Program.

NRCS uses a land evaluation and site assessment (LESA) system to establish a farmland conversion impact rating score on proposed sites of federally funded and assisted projects. This score is used as an indicator for the project sponsor to consider alternative sites if the potential adverse impacts on the farmland exceed the recommended allowable level. The assessment is completed on form AD1006, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating. The sponsoring agency completes the site assessment portion of the AD-1006, which assesses non-soil related criteria such as the potential for impact on the local agricultural economy if the land is converted to non-farm use and compatibility with existing agricultural use.

The Project site and adjacent parcels will not be completed by a federal agency, or with assistance from a federal agency. Therefore, the Project will not be subject to the FPPA.

STATE
Williamson Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly known as the Williamson Act, was established based on numerous State legislative findings regarding the importance of agricultural lands in an urbanizing society. Policies emanating from those findings include those that discourage premature and unnecessary conversion of agricultural land to urban uses and discourage discontinuous urban development patterns, which unnecessarily increase the costs of community services to community residents.

The Williamson Act authorizes each County to establish an agricultural preserve. Land that is within the agricultural preserve is eligible to be placed under a contract between the property owner and County that would restrict the use of the land to agriculture in exchange for a tax assessment that is based on the yearly production yield. The contracts have a 10-year term that is automatically renewed each year, unless the property owner requests a non-renewal or the contract is cancelled.

If the contract is cancelled, the property owner is assessed a fee of up to 12.5 percent of the property value.

The Project site is not under a Williamson Act contract, however, a small parcel immediately south of the Project Site, on the opposite side of Shepherd Avenue, is designated Williamson Act NonRenewal. Figure 3.2-3 Shows Williams Act contact land within the vicinity of the Project Site.

Farmland Security Zones
In 1998, the State legislature established the Farmland Security Zone (FSZ) program. FSZs are similar to Williamson Act contracts, in that the intention is to protect farmland from conversion. The main difference however, is that the FSZ must be designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance. The term of the contract is a 379
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North minimum of 20 years. The property owners are offered an incentive of greater property tax reductions when compared to the Williamson Act contract tax incentives; the incentives were developed to encourage conservation of prime farmland through FSZs. The non-renewal and cancellation procedures are similar to those for Williamson Act contracts.

The Project site and the adjacent parcels are not within the FSZ program.

California Government Code Section 56064
This section of the Government Codes defines “Prime agricultural land” as follows:
• Prime agricultural land means an area of land, whether a single parcel or contiguous parcels, that has not been developed for a use other than an agricultural use and that meets any of the following qualifications:
o Land that qualifies, if irrigated, for rating as Class I or Class II in the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service land use capability classification, whether or not land is actually irrigated, provided that irrigation is feasible. o Land that qualifies for rating 80 through 100 Storie Index Rating. o Land that supports livestock used for the production of food and fiber and that has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit per acre as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture in the National Range and Pasture Handbook, Revision 1, December 2003.
o Land planted with fruit or nut-bearing trees, vines, bushes, or crops that have a nonbearing period of less than five years and that will re-turn during the commercial bearing period on an annual basis from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant production not less than four hundred dollars ($400) per acre. o Land that has returned from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant products on an annual gross value of not less than four hundred dollars ($400) per acre for three of the previous five calendar years.

LOCAL
Local Agency Formation Commission Boundary Controls
The Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) is responsible for coordinating orderly amendments to local jurisdictional boundaries, including annexations. Annexation of the Development Area into the City of Clovis would be subject to LAFCo approval, and LAFCo’s decision is governed by state law (Gov’t Code § 56001 et seq.) and the local LAFCo Policies and Procedures.

State law requires LAFCo to consider agricultural land and open space preservation in all decisions related to expansion of urban development. LAFCO’s definition of Prime Agriculture land refers to California Government Code Section 56064, which is described above. 380
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-13 City of Clovis General Plan
The General Plan includes several policies relevant to agricultural resources. Policies applicable to the Project are identified below:

Policies: Land Use Element
• LU-Policy 4.4. Participate in regional farmland conservation, including the establishment of comprehensive agricultural preserves or easements, through efforts such as the Fresno County Model Farmland Conservation Program or the San Joaquin Valley Greenprint. • LU-Policy 6.2. Smart growth. The city is committed to the following smart growth goals. a. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices; b. Create walkable neighborhoods;
c. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration;
d. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place; e. Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost-effective; f. Mix land uses;
g. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas; h. Provide a variety of transportation choices;
i. Strengthen and direct development toward existing communities; j. Take advantage of compact building design;
k. Enhance the economic vitality of the region;
l. Support actions that encourage environmental resource management.

Policies: Open Space and Conservation Element
• OSC-Policy 2.2. New development. Encourage new development to incorporate on-site natural resources and low impact development techniques. • OSC-Policy 2.4. Agricultural lands. Preserve the city’s agricultural legacy through the Agricultural land use designation, memorialize agricultural history and culture, and facilitate thoughtful conversion of lands to development.
• OSC-Policy 2.5. Right to farm. Support, encourage, and protect agricultural operations within Clovis and recognize their right to farm.

City of Clovis Right to Farm Ordinance
Section 9.40.170 of the Municipal Code establishes the City’s "Right to Farm" ordinance, which is intended to provide the City’s policy regarding the “right to farm” and contains a subdivider’s and owner’s disclosure statement, which acknowledges the subdivider’s and owner’s understanding of the presence of the adjoining agricultural use and the City’s policy regarding its right to continue.

The ordinance establishes the City’s policy to agricultural land consistent with the California Civil Code Section 3482.5 as follows:.

A. Policy of the City.
381
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

1. It is the declared policy of the City of Clovis to preserve, protect, and encourage development of its agricultural land consistent with the California Civil Code Section 3482.5, which provides that no agricultural activity, operation, or facility, or appurtenances thereof, conducted or maintained for commercial purposes, and in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards, as established and followed by similar agricultural operations in the same locality, shall be or become a nuisance, private or public, due to any changed condition in or about the locality, after it has been in operation for more than three (3) years if it was not a nuisance at the time it began.

2. This policy applies to normally acceptable agricultural operations, as defined in the California Civil Code Section 3482.5, and shall not apply if the agricultural activity, operation, facility, or appurtenances thereof obstruct the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any public park, square, street, or highway.

3. This policy shall not invalidate any provision contained in the Fish and Game Code, Food and Agricultural Code, Health and Safety Code, or Water Code Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000), if the agricultural activity, operation, facility, or appurtenances thereof constitute a nuisance, public or private, as specifically defined or described in any of those provisions.

B. Covenant. If a subdivision is at any point within three hundred feet (300') of land zoned for agricultural uses, the approval of the tentative and final subdivision map or parcel map shall be conditional upon the recordation with the County Recorder of a right-to-farm covenant acknowledging, accepting and complying with this section, in substantially the following wording or similar form:

The undersigned in consideration of recordation of said subdivision by the City of Clovis, do hereby covenant and agree with the declared policy of the City of Clovis (Right-to-Farm Ordinance) to preserve, protect, and encourage development of its agricultural land consistent with the California Civil Code Section 3482.5, which provides that no agricultural activity, operation, or facility, or appurtenances thereof, as defined in the code, conducted or maintained for commercial purposes, and in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards, as established and followed by similar agricultural operations in the same locality, shall be or become a nuisance, private or public, due to any changed condition in or about the locality, after it has been in operation for more than three years if it was not a nuisance at the time it began; that the described property is in or near agricultural districts and that the residents of the property should be prepared to accept the inconveniences and discomfort associated with normal farm activities. This covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon all future owners, heirs, successors, and assigns to the property. (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff. October 8, 2014; § 1(2) (Atts. 1, 2), Ord. 20-18, eff. February 3, 2021. Formerly

9.40.180)
382
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-15

3.2.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on agricultural and forest resources if it will:
• 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; • Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; • Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)) or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined in Public Resources Code section 51104 (g));
• Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or • 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.

There are no forest lands or timber lands located within the Clovis Planning Area. There are also no parcels that are currently zoned as forest land, timber, or timber production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would have no impact on forest land, timber, or timber production and this impact will not be discussed further.

METHODOLOGY
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
The California Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model was utilized in the impact analysis shown below. The formulation of the LESA Model is the result of Senate Bill 850 (Chapter 812 /1993), which charged the California Natural Resources Agency, in consultation with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, with developing an amendment to Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines concerning agricultural lands. Such an amendment is intended “to provide lead agencies with an optional methodology to ensure that significant effects on the environment of agricultural land conversions are quantitatively and consistently considered in the environmental review process” (Public Resources Code Section 21095).

The California Agricultural LESA Model is composed of six different factors. Two Land Evaluation factors are based upon measures of soil resource quality. Four Site Assessment factors provide measures of a given project’s size, water resource availability, surrounding agricultural lands, and surrounding protected resource lands. For a given project, each of these factors is separately rated on a 100-point scale. The factors are then weighted relative to one another and combined, resulting in a single numeric score for a given project, with a maximum attainable score of 100 points. It is 383
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North this project score that becomes the basis for making a determination of a project’s impact based on the scoring thresholds of significance.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.2-1: The proposed Project has the potential to result in the conversion of Farmlands, including Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural uses. (Less than Significant) Development of the proposed Project would result in the permanent conversion of approximately

63.60 acres of Prime Farmland and 11.44 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance, as designated by the California Department of Conservation on the June 2020 Important Farmlands Map and as shown on Figure 3.2-1, to nonagricultural use. However, it is important to consider that the California Department of Conservation includes the following note on their map: “This map should be used within the limits of its purpose - as a current inventory of agricultural land resources. This map does not necessarily reflect general plan or zoning designations, city limit lines, changing economic or market conditions, or other factors which may be taken into consideration when land use policies are determined. This map is not designed for parcel-specific planning purposes due to its scale and the ten-acre minimum land use mapping unit. Classification of important farmland and urban areas on this map is based on best available data. The information has been delineated as accurately as possible at 1:24,000-scale, but no claim to meet 1:24,000 National Map Accuracy Standards is made due to variations in the quality of source data.” After looking at site-specific characteristics more closely for the Project site, it is noteworthy that the Department of Conservation’s designations do not accurately and fully consider site specific characteristics such as the existence of a hardpan within the upper horizon of the soil profile, the project size, surrounding urban uses, lack of agricultural protection zones in the zone of influence, lack of water resources, and ongoing economic feasibility of agricultural operations due to other factors. To reconcile this inaccuracy and analyze the site-specific characteristics more fully, the Clovis General Plan calls for the use of the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) to evaluate the significance of the agricultural conversion. It is noted that the LESA model was developed by the Department of Conservation, which is the same agency that published the 2020 Important Farmland’s Map.

The California Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model was utilized to determine the proposed Project’s potential impact on agricultural resources. The LESA scoring for the proposed Project is documented on the LESA scoring sheets in Appendix B. The proposed Project has a final LESA score of 50.50, which is considered to be a significant impact only if the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment sub scores are each greater than or equal to 20 points. The proposed Project has a sub score of 32.50 for the Land Evaluation and a sub score of 18.0 for the Site Assessment, which means the conversion of the land on the Project site is not considered significant according to the California Department of Conservation’s established thresholds. 384
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 3.2
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.2-17 After evaluating the site-specific soil characteristics, project size, surrounding uses, agricultural protection zones, water resources availability, and ongoing economic feasibility of agricultural operations utilizing the LESA Model, it was determined that the conversion of the land on the Project site is not a significant impact. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-2: The proposed Project has the potential to conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or Williamson Act Contracts (Less than Significant)
The Project site is not under a Williamson Act Contract.

Under the Fresno County General Plan, the Development Area is designated for Low Density Residential, with AL-20 (Limited Agricultural) zoning. The Non-Development Area is designated for Rural Residential, with RR (Rural Residential) zoning. Any new development would be done after annexation from the County into the City limits, which would shift any land use and zoning decisions to the City of Clovis. The Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) will require any land that is annexed into the City limits to be pre-zoned by the City of Clovis in conjunction with the proposed annexation. The proposed pre-zoning is for a Single-Family Planned Residential Development (R-1-PRD) zoning designation over the entire Development Area. The NonDevelopment Area would not receive a pre-zone since it is not proposed for annexation. Any prezoning approved by the City would go into effect upon annexation approval by LAFCo.

The proposed pre-zoning is consistent with the proposed residential uses. Additionally, conversion of the Project site from agricultural to urban uses has been anticipated by the City under the adopted General Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-3: The proposed Project has the potential to result in conflicts with adjacent agricultural lands or indirectly cause conversion of agricultural lands (Less than Significant)
The designated prime farmland immediately west of the Project site has been approved for residential development and has not yet been updated in the FMMP. In the next version of the FMMP that land will be mapped as Urban and Built-Up Land. There is no immediately adjacent agricultural land that poses a potential for conflict. The City’s General Plan anticipates that some agricultural lands within the City’s Planning Area would ultimately develop with urban uses.

Nevertheless, the City has a Right to Farm Ordinance that is intended to reduce the occurrence of any conflict between nonagricultural and agricultural land uses within the City through requiring the transferor of any property in the City to provide a disclosure statement describing that the City permits agricultural operations, including those that utilize chemical fertilizers and pesticides.

Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic and no mitigation is required.
385
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
386
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

SERENA AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

RIORDAN AVE

BURL AVE
BURGAN
AV
E

PLUM TREE AVE

BUNDY AVE

FOWLER AVE

POWERS AVE

WHITTIER AVE

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

WINDMILL AVE

LESTER AVE

VINTAGE AVE

EDDY AVE

PRESCOTT AVE

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

FARMHOUSEAVE

SOLAR DR

PURDUE AVE VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

KELSO AVE

PHILLIP AVE

RENN AVE

STANFORDAVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

PROVINCE DR

POWERS AVE

DUKE AVE

PERRIN AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
0 200 400
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
Prime Farmland
Farmland of Statewide
Importance
Farmland of Local
Importance
Vacant or Disturbed Land
Rural Residential Land
Urban and Built-Up Land
Figure 3.2-1. Important
Farmlands
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
387
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
388
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

A R A
H C

T Z B A
S E A

T Z B A
G G
A N
G F
G TA

H A G F
R E
VA A
D N
B C C
R H
G F
A R A

SHEPHERD AVE

FOWLER AVE

MARION AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE RUSSELL AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

GLEN ALVA LNGLEN KIPPEN LN

HEIRLOOM AVE

WINDMILL AVE

PIONEER AVE

EVERGLADE AVE GLEN BROUGHTON LN ELM AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

DUKE AVE

FARMHOUSE AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

SERENA AVE

VINTAGE AVE

BLOOM AVE

PERRIN AVE
S
TAN

FORD AVE

PERRIN AVE

SERENA AVE

GLEN DUNBAR LN

PURDUE AVE
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
NRCS Soil Description
An - Alamo clay
AoB - Atwater loamy sand, 3-9 %
ArA - Atwater sandy loam, 0-3 %
BcC - Blasingame loam, 3-15 %
Dn - Dello sandy loam
Gf - Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0-1 %, MLRA 17
Gg - Grangeville fine sandy loam, saline alkali
GtA - Greenfield sandy loam, 0 to 3 %
Ha - Hanford coarse sandy loam
Hc - Hanford sandy loam
Re - Ramona loam, hard substratum
Rh - Riverwash
SeA - San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3 %
TzbA - Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 3 %
VaA - Visalia sandy loam, 0 to 3 %
Figure 3.2-2: Soils Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS; NRCS Soil Survey. Map date: May 8, 2023. ±
0 150 300
Feet

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
389
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
390
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVE

BURL AVE

BURGAN AV
E

PLUM TREE AVE

BUNDY AVE

FOWLER AVE WHITTIER AVE

ELM AVE

ARGYLE AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

MARION AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

PRESCOTTAVE

LOYOLA AVE

PURDUE AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

POWERS AVE

RENN AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

VERMONT AVE

PERRIN AVE

STANFORD AVE

PROVINCE DR

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
±
0 200 400
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
Williamson Act Non-Renewal
Figure 3..2-3. Williamson Act
Notes: Fresno County GIS employees provided a database of Williamson Act lands by parcel number (APN) on June 25th, 2015.

Sources: Fresno County GIS. Data Basin. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
391
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

3.2-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
392
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-1 This section describes the regional air quality, current attainment status of the air basin, local sensitive receptors, emission sources, and impacts that are likely to result from Project implementation. The analysis contained in this section is intended to be at a project-level, and covers impacts associated with the conversion of the Development Area to urban uses. Following this discussion is an assessment of consistency of the proposed Project with applicable policies and local plans. The Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change analysis is located in a separate section of this document. This section is based in part on the following technical studies: Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (California Air Resources Board [CARB], 2007), Guide for Assessing and Mitigation Air Quality Impacts (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District [SJAVPCD], 2002), Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts - 2015 (SJAVPCD, 2015), and CalEEMod (v.2020.4.0) (CAPCOA, 2021).

There was one comment received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) comment period regarding air quality. The comment was provided from the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District (June 10, 2022). All comments are included in Appendix A.

3.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN
The City of Clovis (City) is in the central portion of the San Joaquin Air Basin (SJVAB). The SJVAB consists of eight counties: Fresno, Kern (western and central), Kings, Tulare, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus. Air pollution from significant activities in the SJVAB includes a variety of industrial-based sources as well as on- and off-road mobile sources. These sources, coupled with geographical and meteorological conditions unique to the area, stimulate the formation of unhealthy air.

The SJVAB is approximately 250 miles long and an average of 35 miles wide. It is bordered by the Sierra Nevada in the east, the Coast Ranges in the west, and the Tehachapi mountains in the south.

There is a slight downward elevation gradient from Bakersfield in the southeast end (elevation 408 feet) to sea level at the northwest end where the valley opens to the San Francisco Bay at the Carquinez Straits. At its northern end is the Sacramento Valley, which comprises the northern half of California’s Central Valley. The bowl-shaped topography inhibits movement of pollutants out of the valley (SJVAPCD, 2015).

Climate
The SJVAB is in a Mediterranean climate zone and is influenced by a subtropical high-pressure cell most of the year. Mediterranean climates are characterized by sparse rainfall, which occurs mainly in winter. Summers are hot and dry. Summertime maximum temperatures often exceed 100°F in the valley.

The subtropical high-pressure cell is strongest during spring, summer, and fall and produces subsiding air, which can result in temperature inversions in the valley. A temperature inversion can act like a lid, inhibiting vertical mixing of the air mass at the surface. Any emissions of pollutants can 393
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North be trapped below the inversion. Most of the surrounding mountains are above the normal height of summer inversions (1,500 to 3,000 feet).

Winter-time high pressure events can often last many weeks, with surface temperatures often lowering into the 30°F. During these events, fog can be present and inversions are extremely strong.

These wintertime inversions can inhibit vertical mixing of pollutants to a few hundred feet (SJVAPCD, 2015).

Wind Patterns
Wind speed and direction play an important role in dispersion and transport of air pollutants. Wind at the surface and aloft can disperse pollution by mixing and transporting it to other locations.

Especially in summer, winds in the San Joaquin Valley most frequently blow from the northwest. The region’s topographic features restrict air movement and channel the air mass towards the southeastern end of the valley. Marine air can flow into the basin from the San Joaquin River Delta and over Altamont Pass and Pacheco Pass, where it can flow along the axis of the valley, over the Tehachapi Pass, into the Southeast Desert Air Basin. This wind pattern contributes to transporting pollutants from the Sacramento Valley and the Bay Area into the SJVAB. Approximately 27 percent of the total emissions in the northern portion, 11 percent of total emissions in the central region, and 7 percent of total emission in the south valley of the SJVAB are attributed to air pollution transported from these two areas.1 The Coastal Range is a barrier to air movement to the west and the high Sierra Nevada Range is a significant barrier to the east (the highest peaks in the southern Sierra Nevada reach more than one third through the Earth’s atmosphere).2 Many days in the winter are marked by stagnation events where winds are very weak. Transport of pollutants during winter can be very limited. A secondary, but significant summer wind pattern is from the southeast and can be associated with nighttime drainage winds, prefrontal conditions, and summer monsoons.

Two significant diurnal wind cycles that occur frequently in the valley are the sea breeze and mountain-valley upslope and drainage flows. The sea breeze can accentuate the northwest wind flow, especially on summer afternoons. Nighttime drainage flows can accentuate the southeast movement of air down the valley. In the mountains during periods of weak synoptic scale winds, winds tend to be upslope during the day and downslope at night. Nighttime and drainage flows are especially pronounced during the winter when flow from the easterly direction is enhanced by nighttime cooling in the Sierra Nevada. Eddies can form in the valley wind flow and can recirculate a polluted air mass for an extended period.
1 SJVAPCD. Frequently Asked Questions,
http://www.valleyair.org/general_info/frequently_asked_questions.htm#What%20is%20being%20done%20 to%20improve%20ai r%20quality%20in%20the%20San%20Joaquin%20Valley, accessed March 3, 2020. 2 The Sierra Nevada rises to almost 14,000 feet with Mount Humphreys near Bishop, California, while the average height of the atmosphere is about 39,000 feet.
394
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-3 Temperature
Solar radiation and temperature are particularly important in the chemistry of ozone formation. The SJVAB averages over 260 sunny days per year. Photochemical air pollution (primarily ozone) is produced by the atmospheric reaction of organic substances (such as volatile organic compounds) and nitrogen dioxide under the influence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are very dependent on the amount of solar radiation, especially during late spring, summer, and early fall. Ozone levels typically peak in the afternoon. After the sun goes down, the chemical reaction between nitrous oxide and ozone begins to dominate. This reaction tends to scavenge and remove the ozone in the metropolitan areas through the early morning hours, resulting in the lowest ozone levels, possibly reaching zero at sunrise in areas with high nitrogen oxides emissions. At sunrise, nitrogen oxides tend to peak, partly due to low levels of ozone at this time and also due to the morning commuter vehicle emissions of nitrogen oxides.

Generally, the higher the temperature, the more ozone formed, since reaction rates increase with temperature. However, extremely hot temperatures can “lift” or “break” the inversion layer.

Typically, if the inversion layer does not lift to allow the buildup of contaminants to be dispersed, the ozone levels will peak in the late afternoon. If the inversion layer breaks and the resultant afternoon winds occur, the ozone will peak in the early afternoon and decrease in the late afternoon as the contaminants are dispersed or transported out of the SJVAB.

Ozone levels are low during winter periods when there is much less sunlight to drive the photochemical reaction (SJVAPCD, 2015).

Precipitation, Humidity, and Fog
Precipitation and fog may reduce or limit some pollutant concentrations. Ozone needs sunlight for its formation, and clouds and fog can block the required solar radiation. Wet fogs can cleanse the air during winter as moisture collects on particles and deposits them on the ground. Atmospheric moisture can also increase pollution levels. In fogs with less water content, the moisture acts to form secondary ammonium nitrate particulate matter. This ammonium nitrate is part of the valley’s PM2.5 and PM10 problem. The winds and unstable air conditions experienced during the passage of winter storms result in periods of low pollutant concentrations and excellent visibility. Between winter storms, high pressure and light winds allow cold moist air to pool on the SJVAB floor. This creates strong low-level temperature inversions and very stable air conditions, which can lead to tule fog.

Wintertime conditions favorable to fog formation are also conditions favorable to high concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10 (SJVAPCD, 2015).

Inversions
The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the San Joaquin Valley can be limited by persistent temperature inversions. Air temperature in the lowest layer of the atmosphere typically decreases with altitude. A reversal of this atmospheric state, where the air temperature increases with height, is termed an inversion. The height of the base of the inversion is known as the “mixing height.” This is the level to which pollutants can mix vertically. Mixing of air is minimized above and below the inversion base. The inversion base represents an abrupt density change where little air movement 395
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North occurs.

Inversion layers are significant in determining pollutant concentrations. Concentration levels can be related to the amount of mixing space below the inversion. Temperature inversions that occur on the summer days are usually 2,000 to 2,500 feet above the valley floor. In winter months, overnight inversions occur 500 to 1,500 feet above the valley floor (SJVAPCD, 2015).

CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
All criteria pollutants can have human health and environmental effects at certain concentrations.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) uses six "criteria pollutants" as indicators of air quality and has established for each of them a maximum concentration above which adverse effects on human health may occur. These threshold concentrations are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In addition, California establishes ambient air quality standards, called California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). California law does not require that the CAAQS be met by a specified date as is the case with NAAQS.

The ambient air quality standards for the six criteria pollutants (as shown in Table 3.3-1) are set to public health and the environment within an adequate margin of safety (as provided under Section 109 of the Federal Clean Air Act). Epidemiological, controlled human exposure, and toxicology studies evaluate potential health and environmental effects of criteria pollutants, and form the scientific basis for new and revised ambient air quality standards. Principal characteristics and possible health and environmental effects from exposure to the six primary criteria pollutants generated by the Project are discussed below.

Ozone (O3) is a photochemical oxidant and the major component of smog. While O3 in the upper atmosphere is beneficial to life by shielding the earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun, high concentrations of O3 at ground level are a major health and environmental concern. O3 is not emitted directly into the air, but is formed through complex chemical reactions between precursor emissions of volatile organic compounds (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. These reactions are stimulated by sunlight and temperature so that peak O3 levels occur typically during the warmer times of the year. Both ROGs and NOx are emitted by transportation and industrial sources. ROGs are emitted from sources as diverse as autos, chemical manufacturing, dry cleaners, paint shops and other sources using solvents. Relatedly, reactive organic compounds (ROG) are defined as the subset of ROGs that are reactive enough to contribute substantially to atmospheric photochemistry.

The reactivity of O3 causes health problems because it damages lung tissue, reduces lung function and sensitizes the lungs to other irritants. Scientific evidence indicates that ambient levels of O3 not only affect people with impaired respiratory systems, such as asthmatics, but healthy adults and children as well. Exposure to O3 for several hours at relatively low concentrations has been found to significantly reduce lung function and induce respiratory inflammation in normal, healthy people during exercise. This decrease in lung function generally is accompanied by symptoms including chest pain, coughing, sneezing and pulmonary congestion. 396
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-5 Studies show associations between short-term ozone exposure and non-accidental mortality, including deaths from respiratory issues. Studies also suggest long-term exposure to ozone may increase the risk of respiratory-related deaths (U.S. EPA, 2019a). The concentration of ozone at which health effects are observed depends on an individual’s sensitivity, level of exertion (i.e., breathing rate), and duration of exposure. Studies show large individual differences in the intensity of symptomatic responses, with one study finding no symptoms to the least responsive individual after a 2-hour exposure to 400 parts per billion of ozone and a 50 percent decrement in forced airway volume in the most responsive individual. Although the results vary, evidence suggest that sensitive populations (e.g., asthmatics) may be affected on days when the 8-hour maximum ozone concentration reaches 80 parts per billion (U.S. EPA, 2019b). The average background level of ozone in California and Nevada is approximately 48.3 parts per billion, which represents approximately 77 percent of the total ozone in the western region of the U.S. (NASA, 2015).

In addition to human health effect, ozone has been tied to crop damage, typically in the form of stunted growth, leaf discoloration, cell damage, and premature death. O3 can also act as a corrosive and oxidant, resulting in property damage such as the degradation of rubber products and other materials.

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless and poisonous gas produced by incomplete burning of carbon in fuels. Carbon monoxide is harmful because it binds to hemoglobin in the blood, reducing the ability of blood to carry oxygen. This interferes with oxygen delivery to the body’s organs. The most common effects of CO exposure are fatigue, headaches, confusion, and dizziness due to inadequate oxygen delivery to the brain. For people with cardiovascular disease, short-term CO exposure can further reduce their body’s already compromised ability to respond to the increased oxygen demands of exercise, exertion, or stress. Inadequate oxygen delivery to the heart muscle leads to chest pain and decreased exercise tolerance. Unborn babies whose mothers experience high levels of CO exposure during pregnancy are at risk of adverse developmental effects. Exposure to CO at high concentrations can also cause fatigue, headaches, confusion, dizziness, and chest pain.

There are no ecological or environmental effects to ambient CO (CARB, 2019a).

Very high levels of CO are not likely to occur outdoors. However, when CO levels are elevated outdoors, they can be of particular concern for people with some types of heart disease. These people already have a reduced ability for getting oxygenated blood to their hearts in situations where the heart needs more oxygen than usual. They are especially vulnerable to the effects of CO when exercising or under increased stress. In these situations, short-term exposure to elevated CO may result in reduced oxygen to the heart accompanied by chest pain also known as angina (U.S.

EPA, 2016). Such acute effects may occur under current ambient conditions for some sensitive individuals, while increases in ambient CO levels increases the risk of such incidences.

Nitrogen oxides (NOx) is a brownish, highly reactive gas that is present in all urban atmospheres.

The main effect of increased NO2 is the increased likelihood of respiratory problems. Under ambient conditions, NO2 can irritate the lungs, cause bronchitis and pneumonia, and lower resistance to respiratory infections. Nitrogen oxides are an important precursor both to ozone (O3) and acid rain and may affect both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Longer exposures to elevated concentrations of NO2 may contribute to the development of asthma and potentially increase 397
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North susceptibility to respiratory infections. People with asthma, as well as children and the elderly are generally at greater risk for the health effects of NO2.

The major mechanism for the formation of NO2 in the atmosphere is the oxidation of the primary air pollutant nitric oxide (NOx). NOx plays a major role, together with ROGs, in the atmospheric reactions that produce O3. NOx forms when fuel is burned at high temperatures. The two major emission sources are transportation and stationary fuel combustion sources such as electric utility and industrial boilers.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is one of the multiple gaseous oxidized sulfur species and is formed during the combustion of fuels containing sulfur, primarily coal and oil. The largest anthropogenic source of SO2 emissions in the U.S. is fossil fuel combustion at electric utilities and other industrial facilities.

SO2 is also emitted from certain manufacturing processes and mobile sources, including locomotives, large ships, and construction equipment.

SO2 affects breathing and may aggravate existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease in high doses. Sensitive populations include asthmatics, individuals with bronchitis or emphysema, children and the elderly. SO2 is also a primary contributor to acid deposition, or acid rain, which causes acidification of lakes and streams and can damage trees, crops, historic buildings and statues. In addition, sulfur compounds in the air contribute to visibility impairment in large parts of the country.

This is especially noticeable in national parks. Ambient SO2 results largely from stationary sources such as coal and oil combustion, steel mills, refineries, pulp and paper mills and from nonferrous smelters.

Short-term exposure to ambient SO2 has been associated with various adverse health effects.

Multiple human clinical studies, epidemiological studies, and toxicological studies support a causal relationship between short-term exposure to ambient SO2 and respiratory morbidity. The observed health effects include decreased lung function, respiratory symptoms, and increased emergency department visits and hospitalizations for all respiratory causes. These studies further suggest that people with asthma are potentially susceptible or vulnerable to these health effects. In addition, SO2 reacts with other air pollutants to form sulfate particles, which are constituents of fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Inhalation exposure to PM2.5 has been associated with various cardiovascular and respiratory health effects (U.S. EPA, 2017). Increased ambient SO2 levelswould lead to increased risk of such effects.

SO2 emissions that lead to high concentrations of SO2 in the air generally also lead to the formation of other sulfur oxides (SOx). SOx can react with other compounds in the atmosphere to form small particles. These particles contribute to particulate matter (PM) pollution. Small particles may penetrate deeply into the lungs and in sufficient quantity can contribute to health problems.

Particulate matter (PM) includes dust, dirt, soot, smoke and liquid droplets directly emitted into the air by sources such as factories, power plants, cars, construction activity, fires and natural windblown dust. Particles formed in the atmosphere by condensation or the transformation of emitted gases such as SO2 and ROGs are also considered particulate matter. PM is generally categorized based on the diameter of the particulate matter: PM10 is particulate matter 10 398
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-7 micrometers or less in diameter (known as respirable particulate matter), and PM2.5 is particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter (known as fine particulate matter).

Based on studies of human populations exposed to high concentrations of particles (sometimes in the presence of SO2) and laboratory studies of animals and humans, there are major effects of concern for human health. These include effects on breathing and respiratory symptoms, aggravation of existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease, alterations in the body's defense systems against foreign materials, damage to lung tissue, carcinogenesis and premature death.

Small particulate pollution causes health impacts even at very low concentrations – indeed no threshold has been identified below which no damage to health is observed.

Respirable particulate matter (PM10) consists of small particles, less than 10 microns in diameter, of dust, smoke, or droplets of liquid which penetrate the human respiratory system and cause irritation by themselves, or in combination with other gases. Particulate matter is caused primarily by dust from grading and excavation activities, from agricultural activities (as created by soil preparation activities, fertilizer and pesticide spraying, weed burning and animal husbandry), and from motor vehicles, particularly diesel-powered vehicles. PM10 causes a greater health risk than larger particles, since these fine particles can more easily penetrate the defenses of the human respiratory system.

PM2.5 consists of fine particles, which are less than 2.5 microns in size. Similar to PM10, these particles are primarily the result of combustion in motor vehicles, particularly diesel engines, as well as from industrial sources and residential/agricultural activities such as burning. It is also formed through the reaction of other pollutants. As with PM10, these particulates can increase the chance of respiratory disease, and cause lung damage and cancer. In 1997, the U.S. EPA created new Federal air quality standards for PM2.5.

The major subgroups of the population that appear to be most sensitive to the effects of particulate matter include individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary or cardiovascular disease or influenza, asthmatics, the elderly and children. Particulate matter also impacts soils and damages materials and is a major cause of visibility impairment.

Numerous studies have linked PM exposure to premature death in people with preexisting heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms. Studies show that every 1 microgram per cubic meter reduction in PM2.5 results in a one percent reduction in mortality rate for individuals over 30 years old (Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017). Long-term exposures, such as those experienced by people living for many years in areas with high particle levels, have been associated with problems such as reduced lung function and the development of chronic bronchitis – and even premature death. Additionally, depending on its composition, both PM10 and PM2.5 can also affect water quality and acidity, deplete soil nutrients, damage sensitive forests and crops, affect ecosystem diversity, and contribute to acid rain (U.S. EPA, 2019c).

Lead (Pb) exposure can occur through multiple pathways, including inhalation of air and ingestion of Pb in food, water, soil or dust. Once taken into the body, lead distributes throughout the body in the blood and is accumulated in the bones. Depending on the level of exposure, lead can adversely 399
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems and the cardiovascular system. Lead exposure also affects the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood. Excessive Pb exposure can cause seizures, mental retardation and/or behavioral disorders. Low doses of Pb can lead to central nervous system damage. Recent studies have also shown that Pb may be a factor in high blood pressure and subsequent heart disease.

Lead is persistent in the environment and can be added to soils and sediments through deposition from sources of lead air pollution. Other sources of lead to ecosystems include direct discharge of waste streams to water bodies and mining. Elevated lead in the environment can result in decreased growth and reproductive rates in plants and animals, and neurological effects in vertebrates.

Lead exposure is typically associated with industrial sources; major sources of lead in the air are ore and metals processing and piston-engine aircraft operating on leaded aviation fuel. Other sources are waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers. The highest air concentrations of lead are usually found near lead smelters. As a result of the U.S. EPA’s regulatory efforts, including the removal of lead from motor vehicle gasoline, levels of lead in the air decreased by 98 percent between 1980 and 2014 (U.S. EPA, 2019d). Based on this reduction of lead in the air over this period, and since most new developments do not generate an increase in lead exposure, the health impacts of ambient lead levels are not typically monitored by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Both the U.S. EPA and the CARB have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards represent safe levels of contaminants that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant.

The federal and State ambient air quality standards are summarized in Table 3.3-1 for important pollutants. The federal and State ambient standards were developed independently, although both processes attempted to avoid health-related effects. As a result, the federal and State standards differ in some cases. In general, the California standards are more stringent. This is particularly true for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. The U.S. EPA signed a final rule for the federal ozone eight-hour standard of 0.070 ppm on October 1, 2015, and was effective as of December 28, 2015 (equivalent to the California state ambient air quality eight-hour standard for ozone). 400
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-9 TABLE 3.3-1: FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

POLLUTANT AVERAGING TIME FEDERAL PRIMARY STANDARD STATE STANDARD Ozone 1-Hour
8-Hour
--

0.070 ppm

0.09 ppm

0.070 ppm
Carbon Monoxide 8-Hour
1-Hour

9.0 ppm

35.0 ppm

9.0 ppm

20.0 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide Annual
1-Hour

0.053 ppm

0.100 ppm

0.03 ppm

0.18 ppm
Sulfur Dioxide
Annual
24-Hour
1-Hour

0.03 ppm

0.14 ppm

0.075 ppm
--

0.04 ppm

0.25 ppm
PM10
Annual
24-Hour
--
150 ug/m3
20 ug/m3
50 ug/m3
PM2.5
Annual
24-Hour
12 ug/m3
35 ug/m3
12 ug/m3
--
Lead 30-Day Avg.
3-Month Avg.
--

0.15 ug/m3

1.5 ug/m3
--
NOTES: PPM = PARTS PER MILLION, UG/M3 = MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD, 2019A.

In 1997, new national standards for fine particulate matter diameter 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) were adopted for 24-hour and annual averaging periods. The existing PM10 standards were retained, but the method and form for determining compliance with the standards were revised.

In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) are another group of pollutants of concern. TACs are injurious in small quantities and are regulated despite the absence of criteria documents. The identification, regulation, and monitoring of TACs is relatively recent compared to that for criteria pollutants. Unlike criteria pollutants, TACs are regulated on the basis of risk rather than specification of safe levels of contamination.

Existing air quality concerns within Fresno County and the entire air basin are related to increases of regional criteria air pollutants (e.g., ozone and particulate matter), exposure to toxic air contaminants, odors, and increases in greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change. The primary source of ozone (smog) pollution is motor vehicles which account for 70 percent of the ozone in the region. Particulate matter is caused by dust, primarily dust generated from construction and grading activities, and smoke which is emitted from fireplaces, wood-burning stoves, and agricultural burning.

Attainment Status
In accordance with the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), the CARB is required to designate areas of the State as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified with respect to applicable standards. An “attainment” designation for an area signifies that pollutant concentrations did not violate the applicable standard in that area. A “nonattainment” designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the applicable standard at least once, excluding those occasions when a violation was caused by an exceptional event, as defined in the criteria.

Depending on the frequency and severity of pollutants exceeding applicable standards, the 401
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North nonattainment designation can be further classified as serious nonattainment, severe nonattainment, or extreme nonattainment, with extreme nonattainment being the most severe of the classifications. An “unclassified” designation signifies that the data does not support either an attainment or nonattainment status. The CCAA divides districts into moderate, serious, and severe air pollution categories, with increasingly stringent control requirements mandated for each category.

The U.S. EPA designates areas for ozone, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide as “does not meet the primary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” For sulfur dioxide, areas are designated as “does not meet the primary standards,” “does not meet the secondary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” However, the CARB terminology of attainment, nonattainment, and unclassified is more frequently used.

Fresno County has a State designation Attainment or Unclassified for all criteria pollutants except for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5. Fresno County has a national designation of either Unclassified or Attainment for all criteria pollutants except for Ozone and PM2.5. Table 3.3-2 presents the state and national attainment status for Fresno County.

TABLE 3.3-2: STATE AND NATIONAL ATTAINMENT STATUS IN FRESNO COUNTY

CRITERIA POLLUTANTS STATE DESIGNATIONS NATIONAL DESIGNATIONS Ozone (O3) Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Attainment Unclassified/Attainment Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Attainment Unclassified/Attainment Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Attainment Unclassified/Attainment Sulfates Attainment
Lead Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide Unclassified
Visibility Reducing Particles Unclassified
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD, 2023.

Fresno County Air Quality Monitoring
The SJVAPCD and the CARB maintain air quality monitoring sites throughout Fresno County that collect data for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. The nearest active air quality monitoring site to the Project site is Clovis-N Villa Avenue. It is important to note that while the State retains the one-hour standard, the federal ozone 1-hour standard was revoked by the U.S. EPA and is no longer applicable for federal standards. Data obtained from the monitoring sites between 2015 and 2018 (latest year of data available) is shown in Table 3.2-3, Table 3.2-4, and Table 3.2-5. 402
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-11 TABLE 3.3-3 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA SUMMARY (CLOVIS-N VILLA AVENUE) - OZONE YEAR
DAYS > STANDARD 1-HOUR OBSERVATIONS 8-HOUR AVERAGES YEAR

S COVERAGE TATE NATIONAL STATE NAT'L STATE NATIONAL
1-HR 8-HR 1-HR 8-HR MAX. D.V.¹ D.V.² MAX. D.V.¹ MAX. D.V.² MIN MAX 2021 9 37 0 34 0.123 0.11 0.120 0.1 0.095 0.100 0.083 97 98 2020 12 41 2.1 36 0.142 0.11 0.114 0.108 0.095 0.108 0.084 98 99 2019 6 30 0 27 0.103 0.11 0.109 0.080 0.090 0.079 0.084 98 98 NOTES: ALL CONCENTRATIONS EXPRESSED IN PARTS PER MILLION. THE NATIONAL 1-HOUR OZONE STANDARD WAS REVOKED IN JUNE 2005 AND IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT. STATISTICS RELATED TO THE REVOKED STANDARD ARE SHOWN IN ITALICS.D.V. ¹ = STATE DESIGNATION VALUE. D.V.²=NATIONAL DESIGN VALUE.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD (AEROMETRIC DATA ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OR IADAM) AIR POLLUTION SUMMARIES.

TABLE 3.3-4: QUALITY MONITORING DATA SUMMARY (CLOVIS-N VILLA AVENUE) – PM10 YEAR
EST. DAYS > STD. ANNUAL AVERAGE HIGH 24-HR AVERAGE YEAR

NAT'L STATE NAT'L STATE NAT'L STATE COVERAGE
2021 No Data 112.4 37.6 43.2 125.0 208.8 95
2020 5.8 117.5 45.8 50.8 180.9 296.0 100
2019 0 65.9 32.5 32.6 150.9 155.7 100
NOTES: THE NATIONAL ANNUAL AVERAGE PM10 STANDARD WAS REVOKED IN DECEMBER 2006 AND IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT. AN EXCEEDANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY A VIOLATION. STATISTICS MAY INCLUDE DATA THAT ARE RELATED TO AN EXCEPTIONAL EVENT. STATE AND NATIONAL STATISTICS MAY DIFFER FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: STATE STATISTICS ARE BASED ON CALIFORNIA APPROVED SAMPLERS, WHEREAS NATIONAL STATISTICS ARE BASED ON SAMPLERS USING FEDERAL REFERENCE OR EQUIVALENT METHODS. STATE AND NATIONAL STATISTICS MAY THEREFORE BE BASED ON DIFFERENT SAMPLERS. NATIONAL STATISTICS ARE BASED ON STANDARD CONDITIONS. STATE CRITERIA FOR ENSURING THAT DATA ARE SUFFICIENTLY COMPLETE FOR CALCULATING VALID ANNUAL AVERAGES ARE MORE STRINGENT THAN THE NATIONAL CRITERIA.ND=THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT (OR NO) DATA AVAILABLE TO DETERMINE THE VALUE.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD (AEROMETRIC DATA ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OR ADAM) AIR POLLUTION SUMMARIES.

TABLE 3.3-5 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA SUMMARY (CLOVIS-N VILLA AVENUE) - PM2.5 YEAR
EST. DAYS >
NAT'L '06
STD.

ANNUAL AVERAGE NAT'L
ANN. STD.

D.V.¹
STATE
ANNUAL
D.V.²
NAT'L '06
STD. 98TH

PERCENTILE
NAT'L
'06 24-
HR STD.

D.V.¹
HIGH 24-HOUR

AVERAGE YEAR

COVERAGE NAT'L STATE NAT'L STATE
2021 22.0 15.1 No
Data No Data 18 49.6 59 104.6 104.6 100
2020 40.0 18.4 18.4 No Data 18 99.5 62 188.0 257.5 99
2019 No Data No
Data 10.2 No Data 18 28.0 45 53.7 53.7 93
NOTES: ALL CONCENTRATIONS EXPRESSED IN PARTS PER MILLION. STATE AND NATIONAL STATISTICS MAY DIFFER FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: STATE

STATISTICS ARE BASED ON CALIFORNIA APPROVED SAMPLERS, WHEREAS NATIONAL STATISTICS ARE BASED ON SAMPLERS USING FEDERAL REFERENCE OR EQUIVALENT METHODS. STATE AND NATIONAL STATISTICS MAY THEREFORE BE BASED ON DIFFERENT SAMPLERS. STATE CRITERIA FOR ENSURING THAT DATA ARE SUFFICIENTLY COMPLETE FOR CALCULATING VALID ANNUAL AVERAGES ARE MORE STRINGENT THAN THE NATIONAL CRITERIA. D.V. ¹ = STATE DESIGNATION VALUE. D.V. ²= NATIONAL DESIGN VALUE
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD (AEROMETRIC DATA ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OR ADAM) AIR POLLUTION SUMMARIES.

ODORS
Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) 403
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).

With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability to smell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity, but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor; in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person (e.g., from a fast-food restaurant) may be perfectly acceptable to another.

It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity.

Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet, then the person is describing the quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor. For example, a person may use the word “strong” to describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant concentration in the air.

When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration decreases. As this occurs, the odor intensity weakens and eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the concentration of the odorant reaches a detection threshold. An odorant concentration below the detection threshold means that the concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human.

SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiorespiratory diseases. A sensitive receptor is a location where human populations, especially children, seniors, and sick persons, are present and where there is a reasonable expectation of continuous human exposure to pollutants.

Examples of sensitive receptors include residences, hospitals, and schools. The closest sensitive receptors to the Project site include existing residences located within the Project site itself (within the Non-Development Area, to the east and north of the Development Area).

3.3.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL
Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) was first signed into law in 1970. In 1977, and again in 1990, the law was substantially amended. The FCAA is the foundation for a national air pollution control effort, and it is composed of the following basic elements: NAAQS for criteria air pollutants, hazardous air pollutant standards, state attainment plans, motor vehicle emissions standards, stationary source 404
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-13 emissions standards and permits, acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection, and enforcement provisions.

The U.S. EPA is responsible for administering the FCAA. The FCAA requires the U.S. EPA to set NAAQS for several problem air pollutants based on human health and welfare criteria. Two types of NAAQS were established: primary standards, which protect public health (with an adequate margin of safety, including for sensitive populations such as children, the elderly, and individuals suffering from respiratory diseases), and secondary standards, which protect the public welfare from nonhealth-related adverse effects such as visibility reduction.

NAAQS standards define clean air and represent the maximum amount of pollution that can be present in outdoor air without any harmful effects on people and the environment. Existing violations of the ozone and PM2.5 ambient air quality standards indicate that certain individuals exposed to these pollutants may experience certain health effects, including increased incidence of cardiovascular and respiratory ailments.

NAAQS standards have been designed to accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge and are reviewed every five years by a Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), consisting of seven members appointed by the U.S. EPA Administrator. Reviewing NAAQS is a lengthy undertaking and includes the following major phases: Planning, Integrated Science Assessment (ISA), Risk/Exposure Assessment (REA), Policy Assessment (PA), and Rulemaking. The process starts with a comprehensive review of the relevant scientific literature. The literature is summarized and conclusions are presented in the ISA. Based on the ISA, U.S. EPA staff perform a risk and exposure assessment, which is summarized in the REA document. The third document, the PA, integrates the findings and conclusions of the ISA and REA into a policy context, and provides lines of reasoning that could be used to support retention or revision of the existing NAAQS, as well as several alternative standards that could be supported by the review findings. Each of these three documents are released for public comment and public peer review by the CASAC. Members of CASAC are appointed by the U.S. EPA Administrator for their expertise in one or more of the subject areas covered in the ISA. The CASAC’s role is to peer review the NAAQS documents, ensure that they reflect the thinking of the scientific community, and advise the Administrator on the technical and scientific aspects of standard setting. Each document goes through two to three drafts before CASAC deems it to be final.

Although there is some variability among the health effects of the NAAQS pollutants, each has been linked to multiple adverse health effects including, among others, premature death, hospitalizations and emergency department visits for exacerbated chronic disease, and increased symptoms such as coughing and wheezing. NAAQS standards were last revised for each of the six criteria pollutant as listed below, with detail on what aspects of NAAQS changed during the most recent update:
• Ozone: On October 1, 2015, the U.S. EPA lowered the national eight-hour standard from

0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm, providing for a more stringent standards consistent with the current California state standard.
• CO: In 2011, the primary standards were retained from the original 1971 level, without revision. The secondary standards were revoked in 1985. 405
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • NO2: The national NO2 standard was most recently revised in 2010 following an exhaustive review of new literature pointed to evidence for adverse effects in asthmatics at lower NO2 concentrations than the existing national standard. • SO2: On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3- year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb.
• PM: the national annual average PM2.5 standard was most recently revised in 2012 following an exhaustive review of new literature pointed to evidence for increased risk of premature mortality at lower PM2.5 concentrations than the existing standard. • Lead: The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008 to a rolling 3-month average. In 2016, the primary and secondary standards were retained.

The law recognizes the importance for each state to locally carry out the requirements of the FCAA, as special consideration of local industries, geography, housing patterns, etc. are needed to have full comprehension of the local pollution control problems. As a result, the U.S. EPA requires each state to develop a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that explains how each state will implement the FCAA within their jurisdiction. A SIP is a collection of rules and regulations that a particular state will implement to control air quality within their jurisdiction. The CARB is the state agency that is responsible for preparing the California SIP.

Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity requirements were added to the FCAA in the 1990 amendments, and the U.S. EPA adopted implementing regulations in 1997. See §176 of the FCAA (42 U.S.C. §7506) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. Transportation conformity serves much the same purpose as general conformity: it ensures that transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, and projects that are developed, funded, or approved by the United States Department of Transportation or that are recipients of funds under the Federal Transit Act or from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), conform to the SIP as approved or promulgated by U.S. EPA.

Currently, transportation conformity applies in nonattainment areas and maintenance areas. Under transportation conformity, a determination of conformity with the applicable SIP must be made by the agency responsible for the proposed Project, such as the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Council of Governments, or a federal agency. The agency making the determination is also responsible for all the requirements relating to public participation. Generally, a project will be considered in conformance if it is in the transportation improvement plan and the transportation improvement plan is incorporated in the SIP. If an action is covered under transportation conformity, it does not need to be separately evaluated under general conformity.

Transportation Control Measures
One particular aspect of the SIP development process is the consideration of potential control measures as a part of making progress towards clean air goals. While most SIP control measures are aimed at reducing emissions from stationary sources, some are typically created to address mobile 406
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-15 or transportation sources. These are known as transportation control measures (TCMs). TCM strategies are designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled and trips, or vehicle idling and associated air pollution. These goals are achieved by developing attractive and convenient alternatives to single-occupant vehicle use. Examples of TCMs include ridesharing programs, transportation infrastructure improvements such as adding bicycle and carpool lanes, and expansion of public transit.

STATE
CARB Mobile-Source Regulation
The State of California is responsible for controlling emissions from the operation of motor vehicles in the State. Rather than mandating the use of specific technology or the reliance on a specific fuel, the CARB motor vehicle standards specify the allowable grams of pollution per mile driven. In other words, the regulations focus on the reductions needed rather than on the manner in which they are achieved. Towards this end, the CARB has adopted regulations which require auto manufacturers to phase in less polluting vehicles.

California Clean Air Act
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was first signed into law in 1988. The CCAA provides a comprehensive framework for air quality planning and regulation, and spells out, in statute, the state’s air quality goals, planning and regulatory strategies, and performance. The CARB is the agency responsible for administering the CCAA. The CARB established ambient air quality standards pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code (CH&SC) [§39606(b)], which are similar to the federal standards.

California Air Quality Standards
Although NAAQS are determined by the U.S. EPA, states have the ability to set standards that are more stringent than the federal standards. As such, California established more stringent ambient air quality standards. Federal and state ambient air quality standards have been established for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, suspended particulates and lead. In addition, California has created standards for pollutants that are not covered by federal standards.

Although there is some variability among the health effects of the CAAQS pollutants, each has been linked to multiple adverse health effects including, among others, premature death, hospitalizations and emergency department visits for exacerbated chronic disease, and increased symptoms such as coughing and wheezing. The existing state and federal primary standards for major pollutants are shown in Table 3.3-1.

Air quality standard setting in California commences with a critical review of all relevant peer reviewed scientific literature. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) uses the review of health literature to develop a recommendation for the standard. The recommendation can be for no change, or can recommend a new standard. The review, including the OEHHA recommendation, is summarized in a document called the draft Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR), which is released for comment by the public, and also for public peer review by the 407
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Air Quality Advisory Committee (AQAC). AQAC members are appointed by the President of the University of California for their expertise in the range of subjects covered in the ISOR, including health, exposure, air quality monitoring, atmospheric chemistry and physics, and effects on plants, trees, materials, and ecosystems. The Committee provides written comments on the draft ISOR. The ARB staff next revises the ISOR based on comments from AQAC and the public. The revised ISOR is then released for a 45-day public comment period prior to consideration by the Board at a regularly scheduled Board hearing.

In June of 2002, the CARB adopted revisions to the PM10 standard and established a new PM2.5 annual standard. The new standards became effective in June 2003. Subsequently, staff reviewed the published scientific literature on ground-level ozone and nitrogen dioxide and the CARB adopted revisions to the standards for these two pollutants. Revised standards for ozone and nitrogen dioxide went into effect on May 17, 2006 and March 20, 2008, respectively. These revisions reflect the most recent changes to the CAAQS.

Tanner Air Toxics Act (TACs)
California regulates TACs primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (AB 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). The Tanner Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before CARB can designate a substance as a TAC. To date, CARB has identified more than 21 TACs and has adopted U.S. EPA’s list of HAPs as TACs. Most recently, diesel PM was added to the CARB list of TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB then adopts an Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for sources that emit that particular TAC. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) to minimize emissions.

AB 2588 requires that existing facilities that emit toxic substances above a specified level prepare a toxic-emission inventory, prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant, notify the public of significant risk levels, and prepare and implement risk reduction measures. CARB has adopted diesel exhaust control measures and more stringent emission standards for various on-road mobile sources of emissions, including transit buses and off-road diesel equipment (e.g., tractors, generators). In February 2000, CARB adopted a new public-transit bus-fleet rule and emission standards for new urban buses. These rules and standards provide for (1) more stringent emission standards for some new urban bus engines, beginning with 2002 model year engines; (2) zeroemission bus demonstration and purchase requirements applicable to transit agencies; and (3) reporting requirements under which transit agencies must demonstrate compliance with the urban transit bus fleet rule.

Omnibus Low-NOx Rule
The CARB approved the Omnibus Low-NOx Rule on August 28, 2020, which will require engine NOx emissions to be cut to approximately 75% below current standards beginning in 2024, and 90% below current standards in 2027. The rule also places nine additional regulatory requirements on new heavy-duty truck and engines. Those additional requirements include a 50% reduction in 408
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-17 particulate matter emissions, stringent new low-load and idle standards, a new in-use testing protocol, extended deterioration requirements, a new California-only credit program, and extended mandatory warranty requirements. The regulatory requirements in the Omnibus Low-NOX Rule will first become effective in 2024, at the same time as the Advanced Clean Trucks regulations that CARB approved that mandates manufacturers convert increasing percentages of their heavy-duty trucks sold in California to zero-emission vehicles.

Assembly Bill 170
Assembly Bill 170, Reyes (AB 170), was adopted by state lawmakers in 2003, creating Government Code Section 65302.1, which requires cities and counties in the San Joaquin Valley to amend their general plans to include data and analysis, comprehensive goals, policies, and feasible implementation strategies designed to improve air quality. The elements to be amended include, but are not limited to, those elements dealing with land use, circulation, housing, conservation, and open space. Section 65302.1.c identifies four areas of air quality discussion required in these amendments:
• A report describing local air quality conditions, attainment status, and state and federal air quality and transportation plans;
• A summary of local, district, state, and federal policies, programs, and regulations to improve air quality;
• A comprehensive set of goals, policies, and objectives to improve air quality; and • Feasible implementation measures designed to achieve these goals.

LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes several policies that are relevant to air quality. General Plan goals and policies applicable to the Project are identified below:

Policies: Circulation Element
• 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. • 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. • Policy 1.5: Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide 409
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 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 4: A bicycle and transit system that serves as a functional alternative to commuting by 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 riderfriendly 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. • 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 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.
410
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-19 • 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.

Policies: Air Quality Element
• Goal 1: A local environment that is protected from air pollution and emissions. • Policy 1.1: Land use and transportation. Reduce greenhouse gas and other local pollutant emissions through mixed use and transit-oriented development and well-designed transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems.
• Policy 1.2: Sensitive Land Uses. Prohibit, without sufficient mitigation, the future siting of sensitive land uses within the distances of emission sources as defined by the California Air Resources Board.
• Policy 1.3: Construction activities. Encourage the use of best management practices during construction activities to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants as outlined by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). • Policy 1.4: City buildings. Require that municipal buildings be designed to exceed energy and water conservation and greenhouse gas reduction standards set in the California Building Code.
• Policy 1.5: Fleet operations. Purchase low- or zero-emission vehicles for the city’s fleet where feasible. Use clean fuel sources for city-owned mass transit vehicles, automobiles, trucks, and heavy equipment where feasible.
• Policy 1.6: Alternative fuel infrastructure. Encourage public and private activity and employment centers to incorporate electric charging and alternative fuel stations. • Policy 1.7: Employment measures. Encourage employers to provide programs, scheduling options, incentives, and information to reduce vehicle miles traveled by employees. • Policy 1.8: Trees. Maintain or plant trees where appropriate to provide shade, absorb carbon, improve oxygenation, slow stormwater runoff, and reduce the heat island effect. • Goal 2: A region with healthy air quality and lower greenhouse gas emissions. • Policy 2.1: Regional coordination. Support regional efforts to reduce air pollution (criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions) and collaborate with other agencies to improve air quality at the emission source and reduce vehicle miles traveled. • Policy 2.2: Cross-jurisdictional issues. Collaborate with regional agencies and surrounding jurisdictions to address cross-jurisdictional transportation and air quality issues. • Policy 2.3: Valleywide programs. Establish parallel air quality programs and implementation measures with other communities across the San Joaquin Valley. • Policy 2.4: Public participation. Encourage participation of local citizens, the business community, and interested groups and individuals in air quality planning and implementation.
• Policy 2.5: Public education. Promote programs that educate the public about regional air quality issues and solutions.
411
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Policy 2.6: Innovative mitigation. Encourage innovative mitigation measures to reduce air quality impacts by coordinating with the SJVAPCD, project applicants, and other interested parties.

City of Clovis Municipal Code
Chapter 9.22 of the Clovis Municipal Code describes performance standards for air quality (consistent with rules and regulations of the U.S. EPA, CARB, and the SJVAPCD). Chapter 8.18 of the Municipal Code describes expedited permitting procedures for electric vehicle charging stations.

Furthermore, Chapter 8.14 of the Municipal Code describes the permitting requirements for small residential rooftop solar energy systems within the City. Additionally, Chapter 8.1. provides the City’s Building Code, which provides standards for energy efficiency for buildings within the City.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The primary role of SJVAPCD is to develop plans and implement control measures in the SJVAB to control air pollution. These controls primarily affect stationary sources such as industry and power plants. Rules and regulations have been developed by SJVAPCD to control air pollution from a wide range of air pollution sources. SJVAPCD also provides uniform procedures for assessing potential air quality impacts of proposed projects and for preparing the air quality section of environmental documents.

AIR QUALITY PLANNING
The U.S. EPA requires states that have areas that do not meet the National AAQS to prepare and submit air quality plans showing how the National AAQS will be met. If the states cannot show how the National AAQS will be met, then the states must show progress toward meeting the National AAQS. These plans are referred to as the State Implementation Plans (SIP). California’s adopted 2007 State Strategy was submitted to the U.S. EPA as a revision to its SIP in November 2007.3 More recently, in October 2018, the CARB adopted the 2018 Updates to the California State Implementation Plan.

In addition, the CARB requires regions that do not meet California AAQS for ozone to submit clean air plans (CAPs) that describe measures to attain the standard or show progress toward attainment.

To ensure federal CAA compliance, SJVAPCD is currently developing plans for meeting new National AAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and the California AAQS for PM10 in the SJVAB (for California CAA compliance)4
. The following describes the air plans prepared by the SJVAPCD, which are incorporated by reference per CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. 1-HOUR OZONE PLAN
Although U.S. EPA revoked its 1979 1-hour ozone standard in June 2005, many planning 3 Note that the plan was adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007; California Air Resources Board. 2007.

California Air Resources Board’s Proposed State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan. 4 SJVAPCD, 2012. 2012 PM2.5 Plan, December 20. 412
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-21 requirements remain in place, and SJVAPCD must still attain this standard before it can rescind CAA Section 185 fees. The SJVAPCD’s most recent 1-hour ozone plan, the 2013 Plan for the Revoked 1- hour Ozone Standard, demonstrated attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard by 2017. However, on July 18, 2016, the U.S. EPA published in the Federal Register a final action determining that SJVAB has attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS based on the 2012 to 2014 three-year period allowing nonattainment penalties to be lifted under federal Clean Air Act section 179b (SJVAPCD, 2015). 8-HOUR OZONE PLAN
The SJVAPCD’s Governing Board adopted the 2007 Ozone Plan on April 30, 2007. This far-reaching plan, with innovative measures and a “dual path” strategy, assures expeditious attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone standard as set by U.S. EPA in 1997. The plan projects that the valley will achieve the 8-hour ozone standard for all areas of the SJVAB no later than 2023. The CARB approved the plan on June 14, 2007. The U.S. EPA approved the 2007 Ozone Plan effective April 30, 2012.

SJVAPCD adopted the 2016 Ozone Plan to address the federal 2008 8-hour ozone standard, which must be attained by end of 2031.5,6
PM10 PLAN
Based on PM10 measurements from 2003 to 2006, the U.S. EPA found that the SJVAB has reached federal PM10 standards. On September 21, 2007, the SJVAPCD’s Governing Board adopted the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation. This plan demonstrates that the valley will continue to meet the PM10 standard. U.S. EPA approved the document and on September 25, 2008, the SJVAB was redesignated to attainment/maintenance (SJVAPCD, 2015).

PM2.5 PLAN
The SJVAPCD adopted the 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards on November 15, 2018.7 This plan addresses the U.S. EPA federal 1997 annual PM2.5 standard of 15 μg/m³ and 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 65 μg/m³; the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 μg/m³; and the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard of 12 μg/m³. This plan demonstrates attainment of the federal PM2.5 standards as expeditiously as practicable (SJVAPCD, 2020).

All of the above-referenced plans include measures (i.e., federal, state, and local) that would be implemented through rule making or program funding to reduce air pollutant emissions in the SJVAB. Transportation control measures are part of these plans.

SJVAPCD RULES AND REGULATIONS
5 SJVAPCD. Ozone Plans. http://www.valleyair.org/ Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone_Plans.htm, accessed March 3, 2020.
6 SJVAPCD. 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard, http://www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone-Plan-2016.htm, accessed March 3, 2020. 7 SJVAPCD. Particulate Matter Plans. http://valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/PM_Plans.htm, accessed March 9, 2020.
413
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review
On December 15, 2005, SJVAPCD adopted the Indirect Source Review Rule (ISR or Rule 9510) to reduce ozone precursors (i.e., ROG and NOx) and PM10 emissions from new land use development projects. Specifically, Rule 9510 targets the indirect emissions from vehicles and construction equipment associated with these projects and applies to both construction and operational-related impacts. The rule applies to any applicant that seeks to gain a final discretionary approval for a development project, or any portion thereof, which upon full buildout would include any one of the following:
• 50 residential units.
• 2,000 square feet of commercial space.
• 25,000 square feet of light industrial space.
• 100,000 square feet of heavy industrial space.
• 20,000 square feet of medical office space.
• 39,000 square feet of general office space.
• 9,000 square feet of educational space.
• 10,000 square feet of government space.
• 20,000 square feet of recreational space.
• 9,000 square feet of space not identified above.
• Transportation/transit projects with construction exhaust emissions of two or more tons of NOx or two or more tons of PM10.
• Residential projects on contiguous or adjacent property under common ownership of a single entity in whole or in part, that is designated and zoned for the same development density and land use, regardless of the number of tract maps, and has the capability of accommodating more than 50 residential units.
• Nonresidential projects on contiguous or adjacent property under common ownership of a single entity in whole or in part, that is designated and zoned for the same development density and land use, and has the capability of accommodating development projects that emit two or more tons per year of NOx or PM10 during project operations.

The rule requires all subject, nonexempt projects to mitigate both construction and operational period emissions by (1) applying feasible SJVAPCD-approved mitigation measures, or (2) paying any applicable fees to support programs that reduce emissions. Off-site emissions reduction fees (offsite fee) are required for projects that do not achieve the required emissions reductions through onsite emission reduction measures. Phased projects can defer payment of fees in accordance with an Off-site Emissions Reduction Fee Deferral Schedule (FDS) approved by the SJVAPCD.

To determine how an individual project would satisfy Rule 9510, each project would submit an air quality impact assessment (AIA) to the SJVAPCD as early as possible, but no later than prior to the project’s final discretionary approval, to identify the project’s baseline unmitigated emissions inventory for indirect sources: on-site exhaust emissions from construction activities and operational activities from mobile and area sources of emissions (excludes fugitive dust and permitted sources). Rule 9510 requires the following reductions, which are levels that the SJVAPCD has identified as necessary, based on their air quality management plans, to reach attainment for 414
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-23 ozone and particulate matter:

Construction Equipment Emissions
The exhaust emissions for construction equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) used or associated with the development project shall be reduced by the following amounts from the statewide average as estimated by CARB:
• 20 percent of the total NOx emissions
• 45 percent of the total PM10 exhaust emissions
Mitigation measures may include those that reduce construction emissions on-site by using less polluting construction equipment, which can be achieved by utilizing add-on controls, cleaner fuels, or newer, lower emitting equipment.

Operational Emissions
• NOx Emissions. Applicants shall reduce 33.3 percent of the project’s operational baseline NOx emissions over a period of 10 years as quantified in the approved AIA. • PM10 Emissions. Applicants shall reduce of 50 percent of the project’s operational baseline PM10 emissions over a period of 10 years as quantified in the approved AIA.

These requirements listed above can be met through any combination of on-site emission reduction measures. In the event that a project cannot achieve the above standards through imposition of mitigation measures, then the project would be required to pay the applicable off-site fees. These fees are used to fund various incentive programs that cover the purchase of new equipment, engine retrofit, and education and outreach.

Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions
SJVAPCD controls fugitive PM10 through Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. The purpose of this regulation is to reduce ambient concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate anthropogenic (human caused) fugitive dust emissions. • Regulation VIII, Rule 8021 applies to any construction, demolition, excavation, extraction, and other earthmoving activities, including, but not limited to, land clearing, grubbing, scraping, travel on-site, and travel on access roads to and from the site. • Regulation VIII, Rule 8031 applies to the outdoor handling, storage, and transport of any bulk material.
• Regulation VIII, Rule 8041 applies to sites where carryout or trackout has occurred or may occur on paved roads or the paved shoulders of public roads. • Regulation VIII, Rule 8051 applies to any open area having 0.5 acre or more within urban areas or 3.0 acres or more within rural areas, and contains at least 1,000 square feet of disturbed surface area.
• Regulation VIII, Rule 8061 applies to any new or existing public or private paved or unpaved road, road construction project, or road modification project. • Regulation VIII, Rule 8071 applies to any unpaved vehicle/equipment traffic area. • Regulation VIII, Rule 8081 applies to off-field agricultural sources. 415
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Sources regulated are required to provide Dust Control Plans that meet the regulation requirements.

Under Rule 8021, a Dust Control Plan is required for any residential project that will include 10 or more acres of disturbed surface area, a nonresidential project with 5 or more acres of disturbed surface area, or a project that relocates 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials for at least three days. The Dust Control Plan is required to be submitted to SJVAPCD prior to the start of any construction activity. The Dust Control Plan must also describe fugitive dust control measure to be implemented before, during, and after any dust-generating activity. For sites smaller than those listed above, the project is still required to notify SJVAPCD a minimum of 48 hours prior to commencing earthmoving activities.

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Rule 4002 applies in the event an existing building will be renovated, partially demolished or removed (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants); this rule applies to all sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations If asphalt paving will be used, then paving operations of the proposed Project will be subject to Rule 4641. This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt and emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.

Nuisance Odors
SJVAPCD controls nuisance odors through implementation of Rule 4102, Nuisance. Pursuant to this rule, “a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.”
Employer Based Trip Reduction Program
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 (PM10 and PM2.5). The rule applies to employers with at least 100 employees. Employers are required to implement an Employer 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 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. Annual 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. 416
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-25

3.3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on the environment associated with air quality if it will:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard;
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS MODELING
California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod)TM (v.2020.4.0), developed for the California Air Pollution Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with California air districts, was used to estimate emissions for the proposed Project. Project buildout was assumed to be completed in 2028, consistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis, prepared by LSA (LSA, 2023). This may prove to be a conservative estimate because criteria pollutant emission rates are reduced over time (due to state and federal mandates) and would be expected to be even lower than reported in this analysis, should the Project buildout be completed after 2028.

The assumptions for the modeling were selected on a best-fit basis and are consistent with the information provided in Chapter 2.0: Project Description. The land uses modeled include: Single Family Housing – (605 dwelling units); and Open Space – (approximately 5.54 acres). Vehicle trip rates and trip lengths estimated in the modeling are consistent with the vehicle trips rates included in the modeling developed by LSA. The construction phase includes site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases. See Appendix C for further detail.

IMPACTS RELATED TO PROJECT-GENERATED POLLUTANTS OF HUMAN

HEALTH CONCERN
In December 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (226 Cal.App.4th 704) (hereafter referred to as the Friant Ranch Decision). The case reviewed the long-term, regional air quality analysis contained in the EIR for the proposed Friant Ranch development. The Friant Ranch Project is a 942-acre master-plan development in unincorporated Fresno County within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The Court found that the air quality analysis was inadequate because it failed to provide enough detail “for the public to translate the bare [criteria pollutant emissions] numbers provided into adverse health impacts or to understand why such a translation is not possible at this time.” The Court’s decision clarifies that the agencies authoring environmental documents must make reasonable efforts to connect a project’s air quality impacts to specific health effects or explain why it is not technically feasible to perform such an analysis.
417
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North All criteria pollutants that would be generated by the Project are associated with some form of health risk (e.g., asthma). Criteria pollutants can be classified as either regional or localized pollutants. Regional pollutants can be transported over long distances and affect ambient air quality far from the emissions source. Localized pollutants affect ambient air quality near the emissions source. Ozone is considered a regional criteria pollutant, whereas CO, NO2, SO2, and lead (Pb) are localized pollutants. PM can be both a local and a regional pollutant, depending on its composition.

As discussed above, the primary criteria pollutants of concern generated by the Project are ozone precursors (ROG and NOx) and PM (including Diesel PM). The lead agency has determined that, given the nature and size of the Project, a qualitative approach to correlating the expected air quality emissions of Projects to the likely health consequences of the increased emissions is appropriate.

Regional Project-Generated Criteria Pollutants (Ozone Precursors and Regional PM)
Adverse health effects induced by regional criteria pollutant emissions generated by the Project (ozone precursors and PM) are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected variables (e.g., cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, the number and character of exposed individuals [e.g., age, gender]). For these reasons, ozone precursors (ROG and NOx) contribute to the formation of ground-borne ozone on a regional scale, where emissions of ROG and NOx generated in one area may not equate to a specific ozone concentration in that same area. Similarly, some types of particulate pollutants may be transported over long-distances or formed through atmospheric reactions. As such, the magnitude and locations of specific health effects from exposure to increased ozone or regional PM concentrations are the product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout a region, as opposed to a single individual project.

As discussed above, air districts develop region-specific CEQA thresholds of significance in consideration of existing air quality concentrations and attainment or nonattainment designations under the NAAQS and CAAQS. The NAAQS and CAAQS are informed by a wide range of scientific evidence that demonstrates there are known safe concentrations of criteria pollutants. While recognizing that air quality is a cumulative problem, air districts typically consider projects that generate criteria pollutant and ozone precursor emissions below these thresholds to be minor in nature and would not adversely affect air quality such that the NAAQS or CAAQS would be exceeded.

Emissions generated by the Project could increase photochemical reactions and the formation of tropospheric ozone and secondary PM, which at certain concentrations, could lead to increased incidence of specific health consequences. Although these health effects are associated with ozone and particulate pollution, the effects are a result of cumulative and regional emissions. As such, a project’s incremental contribution to specific health outcomes on a regional scale would be very minimal, given the size of the Project. Therefore, a quantitative correlation of Project-generated regional criteria pollutant emissions to specific human health impacts is not included in this analysis.

Other Pollutants of Human Health Concern
The impact analysis does not directly evaluate airborne lead. Neither construction nor future operations would generate quantifiable lead emissions because of regulations that require unleaded 418
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-27 fuel and that prohibit lead in new building materials.

TAC emissions associated with Project construction that could affect surrounding areas are evaluated qualitatively. The potential for the Project operations to expose residents to TAC emissions that would exceed applicable health standards is analyzed qualitatively.

Lastly, the SJVPACD recommends that odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative manner. Such an analysis must determine if the Project would result in excessive nuisance odors, as defined under the SJVAPCD’s Rule 4102 and California Code of Regulations, Health and Safety Code Section 41700, Air Quality Public Nuisance.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.3-1: Project operation has the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in non-attainment, or conflict or obstruct implementation of the District’s air quality plan. (Less than Significant) The SJVAPCD is tasked with implementing programs and regulations required by the Federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act. In that capacity, the SJVAPCD has prepared plans to attain Federal and State ambient air quality standards. To achieve attainment with the standards, the SJVAPCD has established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions in their SJVAPCD Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (2015). Projects with emissions below the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants would be determined to “Not conflict or obstruct implementation of the District’s air quality plan.”
The proposed Project would be both a direct and indirect source of air pollution. Direct sources of pollution include area, energy, and water and waste sources, due to development of the on-site buildings and associated infrastructure. Indirect sources of pollution would be due to the generation of trips of from vehicles traveling to and from the Project site.

CalEEModTM (v.2020.4.0) was used to model operational emissions of the proposed Project. Table

3.3-6 shows proposed Project emissions as provided by CalEEMod. The SJVAPCD provides a list of applicable air quality emissions thresholds.

TABLE 3.3-6: OPERATIONAL PROJECT GENERATED EMISSIONS (TONS PER YEAR) POLLUTANT CO NOX ROG SOX PM10 PM2.5
THRESHOLD 100 10 10 27 15 15
EMISSIONS 20.8 3.6 7.4 <0.1 4.1 1.2

EXCEEDS
THRESHOLD? N N N N N N
SOURCES: CALEEMOD (V.2020.4.0)
The SJVAPCD has established their thresholds of significance by which the Project emissions are compared against to determine the level of significance. The SJVAPCD has established operations related emissions thresholds of significance as follows: 100 tons per year of carbon monoxide (CO, 419
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 10 tons per year of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), 10 tons per year of reactive organic gases (ROG), 27 tons per year of sulfur oxides (SOx), 15 tons per year particulate matter of 10 microns or less in size (PM10), and 15 tons per year particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less in size (PM2.5). If the proposed Project’s emissions will exceed the SJVAPCD’s threshold of significance for operational-generated emissions, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on air quality and all feasible mitigation are required to be implemented to reduce emissions to the extent feasible. As shown in Table 3.3-6 above, operational emissions would not exceed any of the SJVACPD operational thresholds of significance.

PROJECT EFFECTS ON PUBLIC HEALTH
Fresno County has a state designation of Nonattainment for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5. The SJVAPCD developed these Project-level thresholds based on the emissions that would exceed a CAAQS or contribute substantially to an existing or projected violation of a CAAQS. Ambient levels of these criteria pollutants are likely to decrease in the future, based on current and future implementation of federal and/or state regulatory requirements, such as improvements to the statewide vehicle fleet over time (including the long-term replacement of internal combustion engine vehicles with electric vehicles in coming decades).

Ozone
O3 is not emitted directly into the air, but is formed through complex chemical reactions between precursor emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) (also known as ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. The reactivity of O3 causes health problems because it damages lung tissue, reduces lung function and sensitizes the lungs to other irritants. Scientific evidence indicates that ambient levels of O3 not only affect people with impaired respiratory systems, such as asthmatics, but healthy adults and children as well. Exposure to O3 for several hours at relatively low concentrations has been found to significantly reduce lung function and induce respiratory inflammation in normal, healthy people during exercise. This decrease in lung function generally is accompanied by symptoms including chest pain, coughing, sneezing and pulmonary congestion.

Studies show associations between short-term ozone exposure and non-accidental mortality, including deaths from respiratory issues. Studies also suggest long-term exposure to ozone may increase the risk of respiratory-related deaths (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2019a). The concentration of ozone at which health effects are observed depends on an individual’s sensitivity, level of exertion (i.e., breathing rate), and duration of exposure. Studies show large individual differences in the intensity of symptomatic responses, with one study finding no symptoms to the least responsive individual after a 2-hour exposure to 400 parts per billion of ozone and a 50 percent decrement in forced airway volume in the most responsive individual. Although the results vary, evidence suggest that sensitive populations (e.g., asthmatics) may be affected on days when the 8- hour maximum ozone concentration reaches 80 parts per billion (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2019b).

The Project would generate emissions of ROG and NOx during Project operational activities, as shown in Table 3.3-6. Although the exact effects of Project-level emissions on local health are not 420
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-29 precisely known, it is likely that the increases in ROG and NOx generated by the proposed Project would especially affect people with impaired respiratory systems, but also healthy adults and children located in the immediate vicinity of the Project site. However, the increases of these pollutants generated by the proposed Project are not on their own likely to generate an increase in the number of days exceeding the NAAQS or CAAQS standards, based on the size of the proposed Project in comparison to Fresno County as a whole. Instead, the increases in ROG and NOx generated by the proposed Project when combined with the existing ROG and NOx emitted regionally, would affect people, especially those with impaired respiratory systems located in the immediate vicinity of the Project site.

Particulate Matter
Based on studies of human populations exposed to high concentrations of particles (sometimes in the presence of SO2) and laboratory studies of animals and humans, PM can cause major effects of concern for human health. These include effects on breathing and respiratory symptoms, aggravation of existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease, alterations in the body's defense systems against foreign materials, damage to lung tissue, carcinogenesis and premature death.

Small particulate pollution has health impacts even at very low concentrations – indeed no threshold has been identified below which no damage to health is observed. The major subgroups of the population that appear to be most sensitive to the effects of particulate matter include individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary or cardiovascular disease or influenza, asthmatics, the elderly and children.

The Project would generate emissions of PM during Project operational activities, as shown in Table

3.3-6. Although the exact effects of such emissions on local health are not known, it is likely that the increases in PM generated by the proposed Project would especially affect people with impaired respiratory systems, but also healthy adults and children located in the immediate vicinity of the Project site. However, the increases of these pollutants generated by the proposed Project are not on their own likely to generate an increase in the number of days exceeding the NAAQS or CAAQS standards, based on the size of the Project in comparison the Fresno County as a whole. Instead, the increases in PM generated by the proposed Project when combined with the existing PM emitted regionally, would affect people, especially those with impaired respiratory systems located in the immediate vicinity of the Project site.
421
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

CONCLUSION
As shown in Table 3.3-6, the proposed Project’s operational criteria pollutant would not exceed the applicable SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project’s criteria pollutant emissions would be considered to have a less than significant impact.

Impact 3.3-2: Proposed Project construction activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in non-attainment, or conflict or obstruct implementation of the District’s air quality plan. (Less than Significant) Emissions from construction activities represent temporary impacts that are typically short in duration, depending on the size, phasing, and type of project. Air quality impacts can nevertheless be acute during construction periods, resulting in significant localized impacts to air quality.

Construction-related activities would result in Project-generated emissions from demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, building construction, and architectural coatings. CalEEModTM (v.2020.4.0) was used to estimate construction emissions for the proposed Project. Table 3.3-7, below, provides the construction criteria pollutant emissions associated with implementation of the proposed Project.

TABLE 3.3-7: MAXIMUM CONSTRUCTION PROJECT GENERATED EMISSIONS (TONS PER YEAR) POLLUTANT CO NOX ROG SOX PM10 PM2.5
THRESHOLD 100 10 10 27 15 15
EMISSIONS 3.3 3.0 3.5 <0.1 1.2 0.5

EXCEEDS
THRESHOLD? N N N N N N
SOURCES: CALEEMOD (V.2020.4.0)
If the proposed Project’s emissions will exceed the SJVAPCD’s threshold of significance for construction-generated emissions, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on air quality and all feasible mitigation are required to be implemented to reduce emissions. As shown in Table

3.3-7, Project maximum construction emissions would not exceed the SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Nevertheless, regardless of emission quantities, the SJVAPCD requires construction related control measures in accordance with their rules and regulations. Implementation of these control measures (provided in further detail below) would further reduce proposed Project construction related emissions to the extent possible.

The first step is to prepare a Dust Control Plan that meets all of the applicable requirements of APCD Rule 8021. All construction activities are required to implement dust control measures, as required by APCD Rules 8011-8081, to limit Visible Dust Emissions to 20% opacity or less. Dust control measures include application of water or chemical dust suppressants to unpaved roads and graded areas, covering or stabilization of transported bulk materials, prevention of carryout or trackout of soil materials to public roads, limiting the area subject to soil disturbance, construction of wind barriers, access restrictions to inactive sites as required by the applicable rules. The following dust control practices are identified in Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the GAMAQI (2002):
422
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-31 a. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or vegetative ground cover.
b. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. c. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall control fugitive dust emissions by application of water or by presoaking.
d. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, or at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
e. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at least once every 24 hours when operations are occurring. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.
f. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. g. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
h. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

The proposed Project would comply with pre-existing requisite federal, State, SJVAPCD, and other local regulations and requirements, as well as implement the control measures provided by the SJVAPCD for construction-related PM10 emissions.

CONCLUSION
The proposed Project would comply with pre-existing requisite federal, State, SJVAPCD, and other local regulations and requirements, as well as implement the control measures provided by the SJVAPCD for construction-related PM10 emissions. Compliance with the existing rules and regulations would ensure that the Project’s criteria pollutant emissions would be considered to have a less than significant impact.

Impact 3.3-3: The proposed Project would not generate carbon monoxide hotspot impacts. (Less than Significant)
Very high levels of CO are not likely to occur outdoors. However, when CO levels are elevated outdoors, they can be of particular concern for people with some types of heart disease. These people already have a reduced ability for getting oxygenated blood to their hearts in situations where the heart needs more oxygen than usual. They are especially vulnerable to the effects of CO when exercising or under increased stress. In these situations, short-term exposure to elevated CO may result in reduced oxygen to the heart accompanied by chest pain also known as angina (U.S.

EPA, 2016). Such acute effects may occur under current ambient conditions for some sensitive individuals, while increases in ambient CO levels could increase the risk of such incidences. 423
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North The Project site is located in a State attainment area and a federal attainment-unclassified area for carbon monoxide. In addition, CO emissions under Project operation are below the applicable significance threshold promulgated by the SJVAPCD. Therefore, no project-level conformity analysis is necessary for CO. Increases in proposed Project VMT would increase concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) along streets and intersections that provide access to the Project site. Carbon monoxide is a local pollutant (i.e., high concentrations are normally only found very near sources), and can form local elevated concentrations under specific conditions. The major source of carbon monoxide, a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas, is automobile traffic. Elevated concentrations (i.e., hotspots), therefore, are usually only found near areas of very high traffic volume and congestion.

Several factors combine to make substantial concentrations of carbon monoxide unlikely. Existing physical constraints such as high-density, high-profile buildings or other obstructions that could prevent dispersion of carbon monoxide are largely absent. Predominant weather conditions in the area include air movement that would help facilitate carbon monoxide dispersion. Congested traffic conditions that otherwise could result in concentration of carbon monoxide would be of short duration. Further, under existing regulatory and legislative mandates, emissions volumes from all vehicles classes will continue to decline. Given these factors, substantial concentrations of carbon monoxide are not expected at or along any affected roadways or intersections.

CONCLUSION
This Project is located in an area that is designated attainment and attainment-unclassified for carbon monoxide. No Project-level conformity analysis is necessary for CO. Substantial concentrations of carbon monoxide are not expected at or along any streets or intersections affected by the development of the Project site. Impacts associated with carbon monoxide hotspots would be less than significant, and no additional mitigation is required.

Impact 3.3-4: The proposed Project has the potential for public exposure to toxic air contaminants. (Less than Significant)
A toxic air contaminant (TAC) is defined as an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or that may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air. However, their high toxicity or health risk may pose a threat to public health even at very low concentrations. In general, for those TACs that may cause cancer, there is no concentration that does not present some risk. This contrasts with the criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which the state and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards.

Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S. EPA regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The U.S. EPA has assessed this expansive list in their latest rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 37, page 8430, February 26, 2007) and identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources. In addition, the U.S. EPA identified seven compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers from their 1999 424
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

AIR QUALITY 3.3
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.3-33 National Air Toxics Assessment. These are acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butidiene, diesel particulate matter plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM), formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter.

The 2007 U.S. EPA rule requires controls that will dramatically decrease Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to an FHWA analysis using EPA’s MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity (VMT) increases by 145 percent, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual emission rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050. California maintains stricter standards for clean fuels and emissions compared to the national standards, therefore, it is expected that MSAT trends in California will decrease consistent with or more than the U.S. EPA's national projections.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB, 2005) to provide information to local planners and decisionmakers about land use compatibility issues associated with emissions from industrial, commercial and mobile sources of air pollution. The CARB Handbook indicates that mobile sources continue to be the largest overall contributors to the State’s air pollution problems, representing the greatest air pollution health risk to most Californians. The most serious pollutants on a statewide basis include diesel exhaust particulate matter (diesel PM), benzene, and 1,3-butadiene, all of which are emitted by motor vehicles. These mobile source air toxics are largely associated with freeways and high traffic roads. Non-mobile source air toxics are largely associated with industrial and commercial uses. Table 3.3-8 provides the California Air Resources Board minimum separation recommendations on siting sensitive land uses.

TABLE 3.3-8: CARB MINIMUM SEPARATION RECOMMENDATIONS ON SITING SENSITIVE LAND USES

SOURCE CATEGORY ADVISORY RECOMMENDATIONS
Freeways and
High-Traffic Roads
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.

Distribution
Centers
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week). • Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences and other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.

Rail Yards • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard. • Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.

Ports
• Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impacted zones. Consult local air districts or the CARB on the status of pending analyses of health risks.

Refineries • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation.

Chrome Platers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.

Dry Cleaners Using
Perchloroethylene
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry-cleaning operation. For operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with 3 or more machines, consult with the local air district.
• Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perc dry cleaning operations.

Gasoline
Dispensing
Facilities
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities.

SOURCES: AIR QUALITY AND LAND USE HANDBOOK: A COMMUNITY HEALTH PERSPECTIVE” (CARB 2005) 425
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Residences are proposed as part of the Project, which are considered traditional sensitive receptors.

However, the residences would not be located within 500 feet of a freeway or high-traffic road, or be within any of the other CARB minimum separation recommendations on siting sensitive land uses. Regardless, since the proposed Project would not have land uses that would generate a significant risk of public exposure to TACs, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.3-5: The proposed Project would not cause exposure to other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. (Less than Significant)
While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they can be very unpleasant, leading to considerable distress among the public and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and the SJVAPCD. The general nuisance rule (Health and Safety Code §41700) is the basis for the threshold.

Examples of facilities that are known producers of odors include: Wastewater Treatment Facilities, Chemical Manufacturing, Sanitary Landfill, Fiberglass Manufacturing, Transfer Station, Painting/Coating Operations (e.g. auto body shops), Composting Facility, Food Processing Facility, Petroleum Refinery, Feed Lot/Dairy, Asphalt Batch Plant, and Rendering Plant.

If a project proposes to locate receptors and known odor sources in proximity to each other, further analysis may be warranted. However, if a project would not locate receptors and known odor sources in proximity to each other, then further analysis is not warranted. The proposed Project does not include new industrial uses that are not already present in the vicinity of the Project site.

Air district Rule 402 prohibits any mobile or stationary source generating an objectionable odor, with the exception of odors emanating from certain agricultural operations. The California Health and Safety Code §41700 and Air District Rule 402 prohibit emissions of air contaminants from any source that cause nuisance or annoyance to a considerable number of people or that present a threat to public health or cause property damage. Compliance with these rules would preclude land uses proposed under the proposed Project from emitting objectionable odors.

CONCLUSION
The proposed Project does not propose sensitive receptors that would be exposed to odors in the vicinity; nor does it propose uses that would create new odors that would expose substantial numbers of people. Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not result in significant objectionable odors. Impacts associated with exposure to odors would be less than significant. 426
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-1 This section describes the regulatory setting, regional biological resources, and impacts that are likely to result from Project implementation. The analysis contained in this section is intended to be at a Project-level, and covers impacts associated with the conversion of the Development Area to an urban use. This section is based in part on the following: 2014 Clovis General Plan (Placeworks, 2014), 2014 Clovis General Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Placeworks, 2014), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2022), Biological Habitat Assessment of the Tract 6205, Spensley Property, N. Sunnyside and Shepherd Avenue, Clovis, Fresno County, California (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc., 2018) (see Appendix D), as well as site specific surveys and analysis.

There was one comment received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) comment period regarding biological resources from Robert Shuman (May 25, 2022). The commenter states that the on-site orchards are suitable for foraging by Swainson’s hawk and other raptors. The commenter also notes that there are active, well-documented Swainson’s hawk nests within ¼ mile radius of the proposed Project site.

KEY TERMS
The following key terms are used throughout this section to describe biological resources and the framework that regulates them:

Hydric Soils. One of the three wetland identification parameters, according to the Federal definition of a wetland, hydric soils have characteristics that indicate they were developed in conditions where soil oxygen is limited by the presence of saturated soil for long periods during the growing season.

There are approximately 2,000 named soils in the United States that may occur in wetlands.

Hydrophytic Vegetation. Plant types that typically occur in wetland areas. Nearly 5,000 plant types in the United States may occur in wetlands. Plants are listed in regional publications of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and include such species as cattails, bulrushes, cordgrass, sphagnum moss, bald cypress, willows, mangroves, sedges, rushes, arrowheads, and water plantains.

Sensitive Natural Community. A sensitive natural community is a biological community that is regionally rare, provides important habitat opportunities for wildlife, is structurally complex, or is in other ways of special concern to local, State, or Federal agencies. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) identifies the elimination or substantial degradation of such communities as a significant impact. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) tracks sensitive natural communities in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB).

Special-Status Species. Special-status species are those plants and animals that, because of their recognized rarity or vulnerability to various causes of habitat loss or population decline, are recognized by Federal, State, or other agencies. Some of these species receive specific protection that is defined by Federal or State endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as "sensitive" on the basis of adopted policies and expertise of State resource agencies or organizations with acknowledged expertise, or policies adopted by local governmental agencies such as counties, cities, and special districts to meet local conservation objectives. These species are referred to 427
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North collectively as "special status species" in this report, following a convention that has developed in practice, but has no official sanction. For the purposes of this assessment, the term “special status” includes those species that are:
• Federally listed or proposed for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR

17.11-17.12);
• Candidates for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (61 FR 7596-7613); • State listed or proposed for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (14 CCR 670.5);
• Species listed by the USFWS or the CDFW as a species of concern (USFWS), rare (CDFW), or of special concern (CDFW);
• Fully protected animals, as defined by the State of California (California Fish and Game Code Section 3511, 4700, and 5050);
• Species that meet the definition of threatened, endangered, or rare under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15380);
• Plants listed as rare or endangered under the California Native Plant Protection Act (California Fish and Game Code Section 1900 et seq.); and • Plants listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as rare, threatened, or endangered (List 1A and List 2 status plants in Skinner and Pavlik 1994).

Waters of the U.S. The Federal government defines waters of the U.S. as "lakes, rivers, streams, intermittent drainages, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, and wet meadows" [33 C.F.R. §328.3(a)]. Waters of the U.S. exhibit a defined bed and bank and ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). The OHWM is defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as “that line on shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(e)].

Wetlands. Wetlands are ecologically complex habitats that support a variety of both plant and animal life. The Federal government defines wetlands as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(b)]. Wetlands require wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation. Examples of wetlands include freshwater marsh, seasonal wetlands, and vernal pool complexes that have a hydrologic link to waters of the U.S.

METHODS
Pre-Field Investigation
Prior to the field investigation, numerous maps, databases, and reports were reviewed including:
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Quadrangle
• USGS National Hydrography Data Set
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps • National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey 428
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-3 • California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) maps • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB)
• California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) IPac
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Official List Field Surveys
The Development Area was subject to a field survey by Principal Biologist Steve McMurtry (De Novo Planning Group) on May 11, 2021. The site reconnaissance survey served several purposes. First, it served as reconnaissance of the site to establish the existing conditions of the site and to verify information gathered in the pre-field investigation. This included identification of the habitat types, hydrologic features, topography, soil characteristics, and vegetation. The field investigations followed the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (CDFW 2009). Habitat was recorded. Visibility during the survey was excellent.

Additionally, as part of the Biological Habitat Assessment of the Tract 6205, Spensley Property, N.

Sunnyside and Shepherd Avenue, Clovis, Fresno County, California (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc., 2018), a site review was conducted on October 23, 2017. The entire Development Area was reviewed. There were no access issues. The primary objective of the field work was to identify any areas on the site, or immediately adjacent to the site, that potentially supports habitat for sensitive species or aquatic habitat. The orchard manager provided historical and current information on the farming operations.

3.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

GEOMORPHIC PROVINCES/BIOREGION
The City of Clovis is located in the western portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California. The Great Valley Province is a broad structural trough bounded by the tilted block of the Sierra Nevada Range on the east and the complexly folded and faulted Coast Ranges on the west.

The San Joaquin River is located just north and west of the City. This major river drains the Great Valley Province into the San Joaquin Delta to the north, ultimately discharging into the San Francisco Bay to the northwest.

The City of Clovis is located within the San Joaquin Valley Bioregion, which is comprised of Kings County, most of Fresno, Kern, Merced, and Stanislaus counties, and portions of Madera, San Luis Obispo, and Tulare counties. The San Joaquin Valley Bioregion is the third most populous out of ten bioregions in the State, with an estimated two million people. The largest cities are Fresno, Bakersfield, Modesto, and Stockton. Interstate 5 and State Route 99 are the major north-south roads that run the entire length of the bioregion.

The bioregion is bordered on the west by the coastal mountain ranges. Its eastern boundary joins the southern two-thirds of the Sierra bioregion, which features Yosemite, Kings Canyon, and Sequoia National Parks. At its northern end, the San Joaquin Valley bioregion borders the southern end of 429
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North the Sacramento Valley bioregion. To the west, south, and east, the bioregion extends to the edges of the valley floor.

Habitat in the bioregion includes vernal pools, valley sink scrub and saltbush, freshwater marsh, grasslands, arid plains, orchards, and oak savannah. Historically, millions of acres of wetlands flourished in the bioregion, but stream diversions for irrigation dried all but about five percent.

Remnants of the wetland habitats are protected in this bioregion in publicly owned parks, reserves, and wildlife areas. The bioregion is considered the State's top agricultural producing region with the abundance of fertile soil.

LOCAL SETTING
Location
The Shepherd North Project (Project) site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line at the northeast corner of North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue. The Project site is bounded on the north by Perrin Road, on the east by North Fowler Avenue, on the south by East Shepherd Avenue, and on the west by North Sunnyside Avenue. Figures 2.0-1 and 2.0-2 show the Project’s regional location and vicinity. The Project site is in the southwest quadrant of Section 21, Township 12 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM). Figure 2.0-4 illustrates the Project location on the USGS Clovis, California, 7.5-minute series quadrangle map.

Topography
The Project site is relatively flat and is approximately 385 feet above mean sea level.

Climate
Climate in the Development Area is typical of the central San Joaquin Valley with summers that are long, hot, and dry and winters that are cool and mild. Rainfall in the winter averages approximately

10.9 inches per year, falling mainly between November and April.

Vegetation
Vegetation on the Project site consists of agricultural, ruderal, and orchard. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use (pecan orchards). Because of the active agricultural use over the majority of the Project site, there is very limited natural vegetation on the Project site.

Common plant species observed in the perimeter of the agricultural fields include: wild oat (Avena barbata), rip-gut brome (Bromus diandrus), softchess (Bromus hordeaceus) alfalfa (Medicago sativa), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), rough pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), sunflower (Helianthus annuus), tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), sow thistle (Sonchus asper), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), barley (Hordeum sp.), mustard (Brassica niger), and heliotrope (Heliotropium curassavicum). 430
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-5 Wildlife
Agricultural and ruderal vegetation found on the Project site provides habitat for both common and a few special-status wildlife populations. For example, some commonly observed wildlife species in the region include: California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), California vole (Microtus californicus), coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), garter snake (Thamnophis species), and western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), as well as many native insect species. There are also several bat species in the region. Bats often feed on insects as they fly over agricultural and natural areas.

Locally common and abundant wildlife species are important components of the ecosystem. Due to habitat loss, many of these species must continually adapt to using agricultural, ruderal, and ornamental vegetation for cover, foraging, dispersal, and nesting.

Plant Communities
Agricultural and natural plant communities provide habitat for a variety of biological resources in the region. Sensitive habitats include those that are of special concern to resource agencies or those that are protected under a Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Fish and Game Code, or the Clean Water Act (CWA). Additionally, sensitive habitats are usually protected under specific policies from local agencies. Figure 3.4-1 illustrates the plant communities (land cover types) in the vicinity of the Project site.

Table 3.4-1 summarizes the plant communities (land cover types) by acreage.

TABLE 3.4-1: LAND COVER TYPES

LAND COVER TYPE ACREAGE
Deciduous Orchard 77.01
Evergreen Orchard 8.83
Irrigated Row and Field Crops 0.62
Riverine 1.07
Urban 56.16
Vineyard 11.43
TOTAL 155.11
SOURCE: FRESNO COUNTY GIS; NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 2022.

The majority of the Project site is labeled as Deciduous Orchard (77.01 acres) on the land cover types maps. The remainder of the site includes Evergreen Orchard (8.83 acres), Irrigated Row and Field Crops (0.62 acres), Riverine (1.07 acres), Urban (56.16 acres), and Vineyard (11.43 acres).

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the east-west centerline of the area, one located in the southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area, and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foot-tall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

Drainage and Hydrogeomorphic Features
The Development Area has historically drained to the southwest. The site is fairly flat with little change in elevation. Historically, there was a small lake that was located north of the Development Area and has since been filled. A topographic map from 1919 shows the general vicinity of the Development Area.

A query of the National Wetland Inventory Map does not show any stream, creeks, or wetland on the Study Area. The National Wetland Inventory Map code is “PUBHx,” which correlates to “palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded, excavated. Based on a review of historical records, readily available wetland mapping databases, and a site review, the field investigation completed as part of the Biological Habitat Assessment (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc., 2018) confirmed the accuracy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wetland Inventory Map. No wetlands, waters, or any aquatic habitat is present within the Development Area.

There is a man-made conveyance channel (trapezoidal with no vegetation) located along the northern boundary, but outside the project limits.

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
The following discussion is based on a background search of special-status species that are documented in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) records of listed endangered and threatened species from the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database. The background search was regional in scope and focused on the documented occurrences within the nine-quadrangle region (approximately 10 miles) of the Project site. The background search included the following USGS quadrangles: Lanes Bridge, Friant, Academy, Round Mountain, Clovis, Fresno North, Fresno South, Malaga, and Sanger. The Table 3.4- 2 provides a list of special-status plants and Table 3.4-3 provides a list of special-status animals.

Figure 3.4-2 presents the documented occurrences within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site.
432
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-7 TABLE 3.4-2: SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES WHICH MAY OCCUR IN PROJECT AREA

SPECIES
STATUS
(FED./CA/
CNPS)

HABITAT AND BLOOMING PERIOD

PRESENCE

DETERMINATION
bristly sedge
Carex comosa
--/--/2B.1 Marshes and swamps, coastal prairie, valley and foothill grassland. Lake margins, wet places; site below sea level is on a Delta island. -5-1010 m. May-September.

Not Present
California jewelflower
Caulanthus californicus
E/E/1B.1 Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland, pinyon and juniper woodland. Sandy soils. 65-1860 m. February-May. Not Present California satintail
Imperata brevifolia
--/--/2B.1 Coastal scrub, chaparral, riparian scrub, mojavean desert scrub, meadows and seeps (alkali), riparian scrub. Mesic sites, alkali seeps, riparian areas. 3-1495 m. September-May.

Not Present
dwarf downingia
Downingia pusilla
--/--/2B.2 Valley and foothill grassland (mesic sites), vernal pools. Vernal lake and pool margins with a variety of associates. In several types of vernal pools. 1-490 m. March-May.

Not Present
forked hare-leaf
Lagophylla dichotoma
--/--/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Sometimes clay. 190-335 m. April-June. Not Present Greene’s tuctoria
Tuctoria greenei
E/R/1B.1 Vernal pool. Vernal pools in open grasslands. 25-1325 m. May-July. Not Present hairy Orcutt grass
Orcuttia pilosa
E/E/1B.1 Vernal pools. 25-125 m. May-September. Not Present Hartweg's golden sunburst
Pseudobahia bahiifolia
E/E/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. Clay soils, often acidic. Predominantly on the northern slopes of knolls, but also along shady creeks or near vernal pools. 60-170 m. March-April.

Not Present
Hoover's calycadenia
Calycadenia hooveri
--/--/1B.3 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. On exposed, rocky, barren soil. 60-260 m. July-September. Not Present Madera leptosiphon
Leptosiphon serrulatus
--/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest. Dry slopes; often on decomposed granite in woodland. 80-1645 m. April-May.

Not Present
pincushion navarretia
Navarretia myersii ssp.
myersii
--/--/1B.1 Vernal pools. Clay soils within non-native grassland. 45-100 m. Grassy valley floors and rolling foothills in heavy clay soil. 115-795 m. April-May.

Not Present
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
Pseudobahia peirsonii
T/E/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. March-April. Not Present San Joaquin Valley Orcutt
grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
T/E/1B.1 Vernal pool. 10-755 m. April-September. Not Present Sanford's arrowhead
Sagittaria sanfordii
--/--/1B.2 Marshes and swamps. In standing or slow-moving freshwater ponds, marshes, and ditches. 0-605 m. May-October (November).

Not Present
spiny-sepaled button-celery
Eryngium spinosepalum
--/--/1B.2 Vernal pools, valley and foothill grassland. Some sites on clay soil of granitic origin; vernal pools, within grassland. 15-1270 m. April-June.

Not Present
succulent owl's-clover
Castilleja campestris var.
succulenta
T/E/1B.2 Vernal pools. Moist places, often in acidic soils. 20-705 m. (March) April-May. Not Present NOTES: CNPS = CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY
433
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North STATUS EXPLANATIONS:

FEDERAL
E = ENDANGERED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

T = THREATENED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

STATE
E = ENDANGERED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

T = THREATENED UNDER THE FEDERAL CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

R = RARE UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY
1B = RARE, THREATENED, OR ENDANGERED IN CALIFORNIA AND ELSEWHERE. 2 = RARE, THREATENED, OR ENDANGERED IN CALIFORNIA, BUT MORE COMMON ELSEWHERE. 3 = A REVIEW LIST – PLANTS ABOUT WHICH MORE INFORMATION IS NEEDED. 4 = PLANTS OF LIMITED DISTRIBUTION – A WATCH LIST
.1 = SERIOUSLY ENDANGERED IN CALIFORNIA (OVER 80% OF OCCURRENCES THREATENED-HIGH DEGREE AND IMMEDIACY OF THREAT).
.2 = FAIRLY ENDANGERED IN CALIFORNIA (20-80% OCCURRENCES THREATENED). .3 = NOT VERY ENDANGERED IN CALIFORNIA (<20% OF OCCURRENCES THREATENED). 434
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-9 TABLE 3.4-3: SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE AND FISH SPECIES WHICH MAY OCCUR IN PROJECT AREA

SPECIES
STATUS
(FED/CA) GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

INVERTEBRATES
California linderiella
Linderiella occidentalis
--/-- Ranges from near Redding in the north to as far south as Fresno County, mainly to the east of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers
Natural, and artificial, seasonally ponded habitat types including: vernal pools, swales, ephemeral drainages, stock ponds, reservoirs, ditches, backhoe pits, and ruts caused by vehicular activities
midvalley fairy shrimp
Branchinecta mesovallensis
--/-- Extending from Stillwater Plain in Shasta County through most of the length of the Central Valley to Pixley in Tulare County and along the central Coast Range from northern Solano County to Pinnacles National Monument in San Benito County.

Vernal pools with tea-colored water, most commonly in grass or mud bottomed swales, or basalt flow depression pools in unplowed grasslands.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
T/-- Central Valley, central and south Coast Ranges from Tehama County to Santa Barbara County. Isolated populations also in Riverside County
Common in vernal pools; they are also found in sandstone rock outcrop pools.

Antioch efferian robberfly
Efferia antiochi
--/-- Known only from Antioch, Fresno, and Scout Island in the San Joaquin River
No specific habitat information is available.

Crotch bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
--/-- Central California south to Baja California del Norte, Mexico, and includes coastal areas east to the edges of the deserts and the Central Valley
Open grassland and scrub
Hurd's metapogon robberfly
Metapogon hurdi
--/-- Known only from the sand dunes at Antioch and San Joaquin Valley. No specific habitat information is available.

Molestan blister beetle
Lytta molesta
--/-- Distribution of this species is poorly known Annual grasslands, foothill woodlands or saltbush scrub.

Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle
Desmocerus californicus
dimorphus
T/-- Stream side habitats below 3,000 feet throughout the Central Valley Riparian and oak savanna habitats with elderberry shrubs; elderberries are the host plant.
western ridged mussel
Gonidea angulata
--/-- Known to occur in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and British Columbia
Primarily creeks and rivers and less often lakes. Originally in most of state, now extirpated from Central and Southern California.

AMPHIBIANS
California tiger salamander -
central California DPS
Ambystoma californiense
pop. 1
T/T(WL) Central California Lives in vacant or mammal-occupied burrows throughout most of the year; in grassland, savanna, or open woodland habitats. Need underground refuges, especially ground squirrel burrows, and vernal pools or other seasonal water sources for breeding.
western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
--/SSC Found along the coast and coastal mountain ranges of California from Marin County to San Diego County and in the Sierra Nevada from Tehama County to Fresno County
Permanent and semi-permanent aquatic habitats, such as creeks and coldwater ponds, with emergent and submergent vegetation. May estivate in rodent burrows or cracks during dry periods.

BIRDS
black-crowned night heron
Nycticorax nycticorax
--/-- Throughout California Colonial nester, usually in trees, occasionally in tule patches. Rookery sites located adjacent to foraging areas: lake margins, mud-bordered bays, marshy spots.
435
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

SPECIES
STATUS
(FED/CA) GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
BCC/SSC Lowlands throughout California, including the Central Valley, northeastern plateau, southeastern deserts, and coastal areas. Rare along south coast
Level, open, dry, heavily grazed or low stature grassland or desert vegetation with available burrows
California horned lark
Eremophila alpestris actia
--/WL Central Valley and coastal valleys and foothills. Forage in large groups in open grasslands, nesting in hollows on the ground, and are also regularly found breeding on the Valley floor in suitable habitat.
double-crested cormorant
Nannopterum auritum
--/WL Nonbreeding California habitat located along coastal California and the Central Valley. Migrates throughout California.

Colonial nester on coastal cliffs, offshore islands, and along lake margins in the interior of the state. Nests along coast on sequestered islets, usually on ground with sloping surface, or in tall trees along lake margins. great egret
Ardea alba
--/-- Throughout California Colonial nester in large trees. Rookery sites located near marshes, tideflats, irrigated pastures, and margins of rivers and lakes. least Bell's vireo
Vireo bellii pusillus
E/E Central Valley of California and other low-elevation river valleys. Dense brush, mesquite, willow-cottonwood forest, streamside thickets, and scrub oak.
prairie falcon
Falco mexicanus
--/WL Summer resident of southern California in low riparian in vicinity of water or in dry river bottoms.

Found below 2000 ft. Nests placed along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways, usually willow, Baccharis, mesquite. snowy egret
Egretta thula
--/-- Found mostly throughout North, Central, and South America.

Breeds in coastal and inland wetlands. Their range has been limited over time due to habitat destruction and hunting. A migratory species that relocates from the United States and Canada to Mexico, Central America, South America, and the West Indies.

Prefer shallow water inlets for feeding such as salt-marsh pools, tidal channels, and bays. Mostly along coastal areas and islands. During winter time they migrate and roost in the mangroves of the Caribbean.

Swainson’s hawk
Buteo swainsoni
--/T Lower Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, the Klamath Basin, and Butte Valley. Highest nesting densities occur near Davis and Woodland, Yolo County
Nests in oaks or cottonwoods in or near riparian habitats. Forages in grasslands, irrigated pastures, and grain fields
tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
--/T(SSC) Permanent resident in the Central Valley from Butte County to Kern County. Breeds at scattered coastal locations from Marin County south to San Diego County; and at scattered locations in Lake, Sonoma, and Solano Counties. Rare nester in Siskiyou, Modoc, and Lassen Counties
Nests in dense colonies in emergent marsh vegetation, such as tules and cattails, or upland sites with blackberries, nettles, thistles, and grainfields.

Habitat must be large enough to support 50 pairs. Probably requires water at or near the nesting colony
Western yellow-billed
cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
T/E Nests along the upper Sacramento, lower Feather, south fork of the Kern, Amargosa, Santa Ana, and Colorado Rivers
Wide, dense riparian forests with a thick understory of willows for nesting; sites with a dominant cottonwood overstory are preferred for foraging; may avoid valley oak riparian habitats where scrub jays are abundant FISH
hardhead
Mylopharodon conocephalus
--/SSC Tributary streams in the San Joaquin drainage; large tributary streams in the Sacramento River and the main stem
Resides in low to mid-elevation streams and prefer clear, deep pools and runs with slow velocities. They also occur in reservoirs. 436
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-11

SPECIES
STATUS
(FED/CA) GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION HABITAT REQUIREMENTS

MAMMALS
American badger
Taxidea taxus
--/SSC In California, badgers occur throughout the State except in humid coastal forests of northwestern California in Del Norte and Humboldt Counties
Badgers occur in a wide variety of open, arid habitats but are most commonly associated with grasslands, savannas, mountain meadows, and open areas of desert scrub; the principal habitat requirements for the species appear to be sufficient food (burrowing rodents), friable soils, and relatively open, uncultivated ground
Fresno kangaroo rat
Dipodomys nitratoides exilis
E/E Western Fresno County. Alkali sink-open grassland habitats. Bare alkaline clay-based soils subject to seasonal inundation, with more friable soil mounds around shrubs and grasses.
hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
--/-- Occur in all 50 states. Rare in the eastern United States and northern Rockies. Found mainly in the Pacific Northwest and California, Arizona, and New Mexico.

Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees. Feeds primarily on moths. Requires water. pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
--/SSC Occurs throughout California except the high Sierra from Shasta to Kern County and the northwest coast, primarily at lower and mid elevations
Occurs in a variety of habitats from desert to coniferous forest. Most closely associated with oak, yellow pine, redwood, and giant sequoia habitats in northern California and oak woodland, grassland, and desert scrub in southern California. Relies heavily on trees for roosts San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
E/T Principally occurs in the San Joaquin Valley and adjacent open foothills to the west; recent records from 17 counties extending from Kern County north to Contra Costa County
Saltbush scrub, grassland, oak, savanna, and freshwater scrub San Joaquin pocket mouse
Perognathus inornatus
--/-- Occurs throughout the San Joaquin Valley and in the Salinas Valley Favors grasslands and scrub habitats with fine textured soils spotted bat
Euderma maculatum
--/SSC Distributed across large areas of western North America from southern British Columbia to the central Mexican state of Queretaro.

Occupies a wide variety of habitats from arid deserts and grasslands through mixed conifer forests. Feeds over water and along washes. Feeds almost entirely on moths. Needs rock crevices in cliffs or caves for roosting.
western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis californicus
--/SSC Ranges from central Mexico across the southwestern United States (parts of California, southern Nevada, southwestern Arizona, southern New Mexico and western Texas). Significant populations of E. perotis occur in many of the Sierra Nevada river drainages, particularly in the central and southern Sierra, i.e., the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced (North and South Forks), San Joaquin, Kaweah, Tule, and Kern rivers.

Many open, semi-arid to arid habitats, including conifer & deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees and tunnels.

REPTILES
California glossy snake
Arizona elegans occidentalis
--/SSC Patchily distributed from the eastern portion of San Francisco Bay, southern San Joaquin Valley, and the Coast, Transverse, and Peninsular ranges, south to Baja California.

Generalist reported from a range of scrub and grassland habitats, often with loose or sandy soils
coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
--/SSC Historically found in California along the Pacific coast from the Baja California border west of the deserts and the Sierra Nevada, north to the Bay Area, and inland as far north as Shasta Reservoir, and south into Baja California.

Frequents a wide variety of habitats, most common in lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burial, and abundant supply of ants and other insects.
437
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

SPECIES
STATUS
(FED/CA) GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
Northern California legless
lizard
Anniella pulchra
--/SSC California legless lizards are found in California and Mexico. They are found from western central California (San Joaquin and the coastal regions), through northwestern Baja California, and as far south as Colonia Guerrero, Mexico.

Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation. Soil moisture is essential. They prefer soils with a high moisture content.

STATUS EXPLANATIONS:

FEDERAL
E = ENDANGERED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

T = THREATENED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

PE = PROPOSED FOR ENDANGERED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

PT = PROPOSED FOR THREATENED UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

C = CANDIDATE SPECIES FOR LISTING UNDER THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

D = DELISTED FROM FEDERAL LISTING STATUS.

BCC = BIRD OF CONSERVATION CONCERN
STATE
E = ENDANGERED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

T = THREATENED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

C = CANDIDATE SPECIES FOR LISTING UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

FP = FULLY PROTECTED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME CODE.

SSC = SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN IN CALIFORNIA.
438
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-13

3.4.2 REGULATORY SETTING
There are a number of regulatory agencies whose responsibility includes the oversight of the natural resources of the State and nation, including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), USFWS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB). These agencies often respond to declines in the quantity of a particular habitat or plant or animal species by developing protective measures for those species or habitat type. The following is an overview of the Federal, State and local regulations that are applicable to the proposed Project.

FEDERAL
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), passed in 1973, defines an endangered species as any species or subspecies that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is defined as any species or subspecies that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

Once a species is listed, it is fully protected from a “take” unless a take permit is issued by the USFWS.

A take is defined as the harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting wildlife species or any attempt to engage in such conduct, including modification of its habitat (16 USC 1532, 50 CFR 17.3). Proposed endangered or threatened species are those species for which a proposed regulation, but not a final rule, has been published in the Federal Register.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
To kill, possess, or trade a migratory bird, bird part, nest, or egg is a violation of the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (FMBTA: 16 U.S.C., §703, Supp. I, 1989), unless it is in accordance with the regulations that have been set forth by the Secretary of the Interior.

Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act provide regulations to protect bald and golden eagles, as well as their nests and eggs from willful damage or injury.

Clean Water Act – Section 404
Section 404 of the CWA regulates all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S.

Discharges of fill material includes the placement of fill that is necessary for the construction of any structure, or impoundment requiring rock, sand, dirt, or other material for its construction; sitedevelopment fills for recreational, industrial, commercial, residential, and other uses; causeways or road fills; and fill for intake and outfall pipes and subaqueous utility lines [33 C.F.R. §328.2(f)].

Waters of the U.S. include lakes, rivers, streams, intermittent drainages, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, and wet meadows. Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or 439
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(b)]. Waters of the U.S. exhibit a defined bed and bank and ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). The OHWM is defined by the USACE as “that line on shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” [33 C.F.R. §328.3(e)].

The USACE is the agency responsible for administering the permit process for activities that affect waters of the U.S. Executive Order 11990 is a federal implementation policy, which is intended to result in no net loss of wetlands.

Clean Water Act – Section 401
Section 401 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1341) requires an applicant who is seeking a 404 permit to first obtain a water quality certification from the CVRWQCB. To obtain the water quality certification, the CVRWQCB must indicate that the proposed fill would be consistent with the standards set forth by the State.

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
The Rivers and Harbors Act prohibits the obstruction or alteration of any navigable water of the United States. The Act requires authorization from the USACE for any excavation or deposition of materials into these waters or for any work that could affect the course, location, condition, or capacity of rivers or harbors.

STATE
Fish and Game Code §2050-2097 – California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) protects certain plant and animal species when they are of special ecological, educational, historical, recreational, aesthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the State. CESA established that it is State policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance endangered species and their habitats.

CESA was expanded upon the original Native Plant Protection Act and enhanced legal protection for plants. To be consistent with Federal regulations, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. It converted all "rare" animals into the Act as threatened species, but did not do so for rare plants. Thus, there are three listing categories for plants in California: rare, threatened, and endangered. Under State law, plant and animal species may be formally designated by official listing by the California Fish and Game Commission.

Fish and Game Code §1900-1913 – California Native Plant Protection Act In 1977, the State Legislature passed the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) in recognition of rare and endangered plants of the State. The intent of the law was to preserve, protect, and enhance endangered plants. The NPPA gave the California Fish and Game Commission the power to designate 440
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-15 native plants as endangered or rare, and to require permits for collecting, transporting, or selling such plants. The NPPA includes provisions that prohibit the taking of plants designated as "rare" from the wild, and a salvage mandate for landowners, which requires notification of the CDFW 10 days in advance of approving a building site.

Fish and Game Code §3503, 3503.5, 3800 – Predatory Birds Under the California Fish and Game Code, all predatory birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes in California, generally called “raptors,” are protected. The law indicates that it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird unless it is in accordance with the code. Any activity that would cause a nest to be abandoned or cause a reduction or loss in a reproductive effort is considered a take. This generally includes construction activities.

Fish and Game Code §1601-1603 – Streambed Alteration
Under the California Fish and Game Code, CDFW has jurisdiction over any proposed activities that would divert or obstruct the natural flow or change the bed, channel, or bank of any lake or stream.

Private landowners or project proponents must obtain a “Streambed Alteration Agreement” from CDFW prior to any alteration of a lakebed, stream channel, or their banks. Through this agreement, the CDFW may impose conditions to limit and fully mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife resources.

These agreements are usually initiated through the local CDFW warden and will specify timing and construction conditions, including any mitigation necessary to protect fish and wildlife from impacts of the work.

Public Resources Code §21000 - California Environmental Quality Act CEQA identifies that a species that is not listed on the Federal or State endangered species list may be considered rare or endangered if the species meets certain criteria. (CEQA Guidelines § 15380) Species that are not listed under FESA or CESA, but are otherwise eligible for listing (i.e., candidate, or proposed) may be protected by the local government until the opportunity to list the species arises for the responsible agency.

Species that may be considered for review are included on a list of “Species of Special Concern,” developed by the CDFW. Additionally, the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) maintains a list of plant species native to California that have low populations, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. List 1A contains plants that are believed to be extinct. List 1B contains plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. List 2 contains plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more numerous elsewhere.

California Wetlands Conservation Policy
In August 1993, the Governor announced the "California Wetlands Conservation Policy.” The goals of the policy are to establish a framework and strategy that will:
441
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Ensure no overall net loss and to achieve a long-term net gain in the quantity, quality, and permanence of wetland acreage and values in California in a manner that fosters creativity, stewardship, and respect for private property.
• Reduce procedural complexity in the administration of State and Federal wetland conservation programs.
• Encourage partnerships to make landowner incentive programs and cooperative planning efforts the primary focus of wetland conservation and restoration.

The Governor also signed Executive Order W-59-93, which incorporates the goals and objectives contained in the new policy and directs the Resources Agency to establish an Interagency Task Force to direct and coordinate administration and implementation of the policy.

Natural Community Conservation Planning Act
The Natural Community Conservation Planning Act provides long-term protection of species and habitats through regional, multi-species planning before the special measures of the CESA become necessary.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act authorizes the SWRCB to regulate State water quality and protect beneficial uses.

Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins The Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan), adopted by the CVRWQCB in 1998, identifies the beneficial uses of water bodies and provides water quality objectives and standards for waters of the Sacramento River and SJR basins, including the Delta.

State and Federal laws mandate the protection of designated “beneficial uses” of water bodies.

State law defines beneficial uses as “domestic; municipal; agricultural and industrial supply; power generation; recreation; aesthetic enjoyment; navigation; and preservation and enhancement of fish, wildlife, and other aquatic resources or preserves” (Water Code Section 13050[f]). Additional protected beneficial uses of the SJR include groundwater recharge and freshwater replenishment.

Major issues and the general conditions of existing beneficial uses in the SJR are as follows:
• Water Supply: The SJR is not currently a source of municipal water supply for the City of Clovis and is not identified as a source for the proposed Project, although some farms in the region use the river as a source of water for irrigation. The City currently uses groundwater only and surface water from the SSJID South County Surface Water Supply Project (SCSWSP), which does not rely on the SJR.
• Agricultural Supply: Extensive use is made of SJR and Delta waters for agricultural purposes.

Annual water diversions from the Delta by the State Water Project (SWP) and the Central Valley Project (CVP) for agriculture are estimated to reach 4.3 million acre-feet (MAF) per year by 2030. In addition, about 2,000 privately owned agricultural water supply diversions are scattered throughout the Delta, generally consisting of riverside pumping stations. 442
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-17 • Recreation: Water-dependent recreation uses of the SJR and the Delta include swimming, wading, waterskiing, sport fishing, and a variety of other activities that involve contact with the water. Noncontact (water-enhanced) recreation uses include picnicking, camping, pleasure boating, hunting, bird watching, education, and aesthetic enjoyment. • Groundwater Recharge: Water from the SJR and the Delta recharges the San Joaquin Valley groundwater basin. Recharge serves to maintain salt balance in the soil column, prevent saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers, and provide for water supplies. Groundwater is replenished through deep percolation of streamflow, precipitation, and applied irrigation water. Groundwater quality is generally adequate throughout the San Joaquin Valley and the Delta, although at shallow depths within the Delta, the water is often saline and contains high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) and dissolved minerals. Enforceable TDS standards do not exist for drinking water. The need for treatment generally depends on consumer acceptance.
• Fish and Wildlife: The SJR and the waterways of the Delta provide important habitat for a diverse variety of aquatic life and terrestrial wildlife. This includes temporary habitat and migration routes for anadromous and other migratory species, as well as permanent habitat for resident species. Fish dependent on the Delta as a migration corridor, nursery, or permanent residence include Chinook salmon, steelhead, delta smelt, Sacramento splittail, striped bass, American shad, sturgeon, catfish, largemouth bass, and numerous other estuary and freshwater species. The amount and quality of water flowing through the Delta greatly influences the overall productivity of the area on an annual basis. A large assemblage of wildlife uses the Delta either seasonally or year-round, including waterfowl; migratory and resident songbirds; mice, rabbits, and other small mammals; water dependent mammals, such as beaver and muskrat; and predators such as skunk, raccoon, northern harrier, and coyote.

LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes the following policy that is relevant to biological resources:

POLICIES: OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT
• Policy 2.6 Biological resources. Support the protection of biological resources through the conservation of high-quality habitat area.

City of Clovis Municipal Code
Chapter 9.30, Tree Protection Standards, of the Clovis Municipal Code outlines protected trees, heritage trees, and tree removal permit/application requirements.

Section 9.30.040 of the Code states that, except as otherwise provided in Section 9.30.050 (Exemptions), the following trees shall not be removed from private property without first obtaining a tree removal permit:
443
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North A. Heritage trees. Heritage trees in all zoning districts; B. Condition of approval. Any tree required to be planted or retained as a condition of approval of a development application or a building permit in all zoning districts; C. Multi-trunk trees. For multi-trunk trees, any tree which has at least one trunk twelve inches (12") or greater in diameter or thirty-eight inches (38") or greater in circumference, measured four feet (4') above the adjacent grade, except for developed single-family residential properties.

D. Twelve inches (12") or greater in diameter. Any tree which measures twelve inches (12") or greater in diameter or thirty-eight inches (38") or greater in circumference, measured four feet (4') above the adjacent grade in all zoning districts, except for developed single-family residential properties.

E. Parkway trees. Parkway trees and any tree located on public property.

F. Trees required by site plan review. Trees required or memorialized under site plan review. (See Chapter 56 of this title) (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff. October 8, 2014) Chapter 9.120, Definitions, of the Municipal Code includes the following definition for heritage trees:

Heritage tree. Any tree so designated by the Protected Tree Advisory Committee based on the finding that the tree has character, significant age and girth, interest or value as part of the development of and/or exemplification of the agricultural, cultural, economic, educational, social, indigenous or historical heritage of the City and identified on the historic resources inventory.

Section 9.30.050, Exemptions, states that the following tree types and conditions are exempt from Chapter 9.30 and may be removed without approval of a tree removal permit:

A. Emergencies. Trees that pose an immediate threat to persons or property during an emergency or are determined to constitute an emergency, upon order of the Director, the Public Utilities Director, or any member of the Police or Fire Departments.

B. Public nuisance. Any tree in a condition to constitute a public nuisance, as defined in Chapter 1 of Title 10, when the declaration of a public nuisance has been made by the Building Official, the Director, the Fire Chief, or the Public Utilities Director.

C. Public utilities. Trees that undermine or impact the safe operation of public utilities.

D. Fruit trees. Fruit tree(s) in any zoning district.

E. Eucalyptus trees. All trees of the genus Myrtaceae.

F. Developed single-family residential. Any tree located on developed single-family residential property, except as specified in Section 9.30.040 (Protected trees). (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff.

October 8, 2014)
Further, Section 9.30.090, Replacement trees, outlines requirements for replacement trees. 444
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-19

3.4.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on biological resources if it will:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
• 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; • 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;
• 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;
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Impact 3.4-1: The proposed Project has the potential to have a direct or indirect effect on special-status invertebrate species. (Less than Significant)
According to the CNDDB, there are nine special-status invertebrate species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: California linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis), midvalley fairy shrimp (Branchinecta mesovallensis), Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), Antioch efferian robberfly (Efferia antiochi), Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii), Hurd's metapogon robberfly (Metapogon hurdi), Molestan blister beetle (Lytta molesta), Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), and western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulata).

Field surveys/habitat evaluations for the entire Project site were performed on May 11, 2021 (De Novo Planning Group) and October 23, 2017 (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc.).

California linderiella requires natural and artificial, seasonally ponded habitat types including: vernal pools, swales, ephemeral drainages, stock ponds, reservoirs, ditches, backhoe pits, and ruts caused by vehicular activities. California linderiella is not anticipated to be directly affected by any individual 445
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North phase or component of the proposed Project because there are no seasonally ponded habitat types in the Project site.

Midvalley fairy shrimp requires vernal pools with tea-colored water, most commonly in grass or mud bottomed swales, or basalt flow depression pools in unplowed grasslands. Midvalley fairy shrimp is not anticipated to be directly affected by any individual phase or component of the proposed Project because there are no vernal pool habitat types in the Project site.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp is a Federal threatened invertebrate found in the Central Valley, central and south Coast Ranges from Tehama County to Santa Barbara County. They are commonly found in vernal pools and in sandstone rock outcrop pools. Vernal pool fairy shrimp is not anticipated to be directly affected by any individual phase or component of the proposed Project because there in not appropriate vernal pool habitat on the Project site.

Valley elderberry longhorn beetle is a Federal threatened insect, proposed for delisting. Elderberry (Sambucus sp.), which is a primary host species for valley elderberry longhorn beetle, is not present within the Project site. Valley elderberry longhorn beetle is not anticipated to be directly affected by any individual phase or component of the proposed Project because there are no blue elderberry shrubs in the Project site.

Western ridged mussel occurs primarily within creeks and rivers, and less often lakes. Originally in most of state, this species is now extirpated from Central and Southern California. Aquatic habitat for this species is not found on-site.

Essential habitat for Antioch efferian robberfly, Molestan blister beetle, and Hurd's metapogon robberfly is not present on the Project site.

No special-status invertebrates, or their habitat, were observed within the Project site during field surveys and none are expected to be affected by the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on special-status invertebrate species.

Impact 3.4-2: The proposed Project has the potential to have direct or indirect effects on special-status reptile and amphibian species. (Less than Significant)
According to the CNDDB, there are four special-status reptile species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), and Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra). Additionally, there are two special-status amphibian species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: California tiger salamander - central California DPS (Ambystoma californiense [A. tigrinum c.] pop. 1) and western spadefoot (Spea hammondii).

California Tiger Salamander: California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) is both federally and state listed as endangered. CTS is endemic to California and the historical presence of it likely includes grassland habitats that are found throughout the state. The primary cause for decline in 446
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-21 populations has been habitat loss and fragmentation due to urban and agricultural development, land conversion, and other human-caused factors. California tiger salamander occupy different habitats depending on the state of their life cycle and breeding cycle. CTS require seasonal ponds that retain water until at least May or June in order to successfully breed and the young to mature.

Once the aquatic larvae have matured, they relocate to the dry upland habitat to aestivate (oversummer) during the hot dry summers, seeking shelter in underground burrows. Once the winter rains return and suitable ponding has occurred, the adults return to the seasonal ponds to breed. During years of low rainfall, the males may migrate into the seasonal ponds, but the females may remain in their upland habitat. There appears to be a strong association between grazed communities, burrowing mammals, and the presence of CTS (USDOI 2009). Adults will find burrows dug by California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi) and pocket gophers (Thomomys bottaeto) to aestivate (Barry and Shaffer 1994, Trenham 2001).

Typically, CTS breed in seasonal wetlands, ponds (including some farm ponds) or in slow moving portions of creeks. The upland habitat they use is typically grassland or ruderal habitat that has friable soils and supports a burrowing rodent. CTS have been reported to travel up to 1.3 miles between breeding habitat and upland habitat.

The nearest California tiger salamander (CTS) record (occurrence record # 613) is located south of the Study Area, just southwest of the intersection of Nees Avenue and N. Fowler Avenue.

This record is from 1974 and the species was found in a vernal pool. Jennings considered this record extirpated (species no longer present), since the land has since been converted to dense residential.

A second CTS record was found in the CNDDB. This record (occurrence record # 888) is located to the northeast along Dry Creek (1.5 miles from the center of the Study Area, and 1.3 miles from the eastern edge of the Study Area). This record is from2006 and CTS larva wasfound in a swale adjacent to the man-made Dry Creek channel just below the Big Dry Reservoir. The surrounding land has vernal pool and other seasonal wetlands.

The Project site does not support any aquatic habitat that could support CTS. The channel/ditch located immediately north of the Study Area remains dry except in response to groundwater pumping or some return flows from the orchard during the non-breeding season (personal conversation with the orchard manager, 2017). The ditch does not pond water, but instead has a flashy hydrologic regime (days). The channel/ditch is not suitable habitat for CTS because it lacks sufficient ponding during the breeding season.

The Project site also does not support ground burrowing mammals given that it is an active orchard with a rodent control program being implemented onsite. Additionally, there is no physical evidence of burrows that could be used for estivation by CTS. The existing residential areas in the vicinity have limited habitat quality for this species. Overall, it is highly unlikely that the orchard or residential areas would support a CTS population.

Western Pond Turtle: The western pond turtle is a California species of special concern. This species’ favored habitats include streams, large rivers and canals with slow-moving water, aquatic 447
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North vegetation, and open basking sites. Although the turtles must live near water, they can tolerate drought by burrowing into the muddy beds of dried drainages. This species feeds mainly on invertebrates, such as insects and worms, but will also consume small fish, frogs, mammals and some plants. Western pond turtle predators include raccoons, coyotes, raptors, weasels, large fish, and bullfrogs. This species breeds from mid to late spring in adjacent open grasslands or sandy banks.

A western pond turtle record is located to the southeast, south of Shepherd Avenue. The Project site does not support any aquatic habitat that could support this species. The channel/ditch located immediately north of the Study Area remains dry except in response to groundwater pumping or some return flows from the orchard during the non-breeding season (personal conversation with the orchard manager, 2017). The ditch does not pond water, but instead has a flashy hydrologic regime (days). The channel/ditch is not suitable habitat for CTS because it lacks sufficient ponding during the breeding season. Western pond turtle requires persistent ponded water, which does not occur within the Study Area.

Western Spadefoot: The western spadefoot is a California species of special concern. This species is found in the Sierra Nevada foothills, Central Valley, Coast Ranges, and coastal counties in southern California. Its favored habitats include shallow streams with riffles and seasonal wetlands, such as vernal pools in annual grasslands and oak woodlands.

The CNDDB search shows the species occurs within a 9-quad search; however, there are no records proximate to the Project site and field surveys revealed that the necessary aquatic habitat and upland habitat is not present.

Conclusion: The Project site does not contain suitable aquatic or upland habitat for special status reptiles or amphibians known to occur in the region. No special-status reptiles or amphibians, or their habitat, were observed within the Project site during the field surveys and none are expected to be affected by the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on special-status reptile or amphibian species.

Impact 3.4-3: The proposed Project has the potential to have direct or indirect effects on special-status bird species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
According to the CNDDB, there are thirteen (13) special-status bird species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), double-crested cormorant (Nannopterum auritum), great egret (Ardea alba), least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), snowy egret (Egretta thula), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), and Western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus Occidentalis). The Project site may provide suitable foraging habitat for a variety of potentially occurring special-status birds, including some of those listed above. Potential nesting habitat is present in a variety of trees located within the Project site and in the vicinity. There is also the 448
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-23 potential for other special-status birds that do not nest in this region and represent migrants or winter visitants to forage on the Project site.

NESTING RAPTORS (BIRDS OF PREY)
All raptors (owls, hawks, eagles, falcons), including common species, and their nests, are protected from take pursuant to the Fish and Game Code of California Section 3503.5, and the federal MBTA, among other federal and state regulations. Powerlines on the Project site and trees located in the region represent potentially suitable nesting habitat for a variety of special-status raptors. The Project site is generally not suitable for nesting raptors other than ground nesters. In general, raptor nesting occurs from late February and early March through late July and early August, depending on various environmental conditions.

CNDDB Documented Raptor Species
Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is state threatened and is a migrant species that spends much of the spring, summer, and early fall in California’s Central Valley. Their preferred nesting habitat consists of valley oaks, cottonwoods, and other tall trees adjacent to both agricultural fields and grasslands. They have been observed more frequently in recent years within the Central Valley. Due to the recent expansion of their population, it is possible that agricultural, grassland, and rural residential areas may support foraging and possibly nesting hawks. However, the orchard is not considered quality habitat for foraging or nesting. This species generally prefers open fields for foraging, and tall trees for nesting. The Project site is within the range of documented Swainson’s hawk, and given the high mobility of the species, it is possible that an individual could be present on the site at some future time even though none have been observed or recorded in the past.

Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) is a species of concern in California. It is a small owl that typically lives in grassland habitats of the Central Valley region that also support California ground squirrels.

The species will also sometimes overwinter or even nest within agricultural areas, using whatever is available (pipes, ground holes/burrows). The owl seeks shelter and breeds from February to July.

Although the numbers of owls have declined in some parts of California over the past 20 years, their numbers have increased greatly in some agricultural areas. In Fresno County, the species mostly occurs on the valley floor.

The orchard is not considered quality habitat for foraging or nesting for this species. The Project site is within the range of this species and given the high mobility of the species, it is possible that an individual could be present on the site at some future time even though none have been observed or recorded in the past.

Other Raptor Species
Bald Eagle: Bald eagle is listed by CDFW as an Endangered species. The breeding range includes the Sierra Nevada, Cascade Range and portions of the Coast Ranges; winter range expands to include most of the state. This species forages primarily in large inland fish‐bearing waters with adjacent large trees or snags and occasionally in uplands with abundant rabbits, other small mammals, or carrion. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species. 449
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Cooper’s Hawk: Cooper’s hawk is protected by the MBTA and the Fish and Game Code. They prefer open woodland habitat. Nest sites for this species are mainly found in riparian growths of deciduous trees, in canyon bottoms on river floodplains, and also in live oaks. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Ferruginous Hawk: Ferruginous hawk is listed by CDFW as a Watch List species. They prefer open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills, and fringes of pinyon and juniper habitats.

This species eats mostly lagomorphs, ground squirrels, and mice. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Golden Eagle: Golden eagle is listed by CDFW as a Fully Protected species. The winter range for this species spans most of California; the breeding range excludes the Central Valley floor. This species nests in cliffs, rocky outcrops, and large trees. Golden eagles typically forage in a variety of open habitats, including grassland, shrubland, and cropland. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Merlin: The Merlin is a CDFW species of special concern that has never been observed nesting in California. Though it is a transient throughout most of the state, wintering populations are known to occur in the Central Valley and along the coast. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Northern Harrier: Northern harrier is listed by CDFW as a Watch List species. They prefer a variety of open grassland, wetland, and agricultural habitats. Open wetland habitats used for breeding include marshy meadows, wet and lightly grazed pastures, and freshwater and brackish marshes.

Northern Harrier breeding habitat also includes dry upland habitats, including grasslands, croplands, drained marshlands, and shrub-steppe in cold deserts. This species is a ground nester. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Prairie Falcon: Prairie falcon is listed by CDFW as a Watch List species. They are a summer resident of southern California in low riparian in the vicinity of water or in dry river bottoms. They are found below 2000 ft and nests are placed along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways, usually willow, Baccharis, mesquite. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

White-Tailed Kite: White-tailed kite is a CDFW Fully Protected species. This non-migrating bird typically attains a wingspan of approximately 40 inches and feeds primarily on insects, small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, which it forages from open grasslands. It builds a platform-like nest of sticks in trees or shrubs and lays 3 to 5 eggs, but may brood a second clutch if prey is abundant. The kite’s distinct style of hunting includes hovering before diving onto its target. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

NESTING PASSERINE BIRDS (SONGBIRDS)
Bank Swallow: Bank swallow is listed by CDFW as a Threatened species. They typically prefer to nest along banks or bluffs along rivers or coastal areas. This species also prefers low gradient and 450
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-25 meandering rivers or bodies of water. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

California Horned Lark: This species is listed by CDFW as a Watch List species. They prefer to forage in large groups in open grasslands, nesting in hollows on the ground, and are also regularly found breeding on the Valley floor in suitable habitat. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Least Bell’s Vireo: This species is listed by CDFW as a federal and CDFW Endangered species. They are found in the Central Valley of California and other low-elevation river valleys. They prefer dense brush, mesquite, willow-cottonwood forest, streamside thickets, and scrub oak. The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Loggerhead Shrike: loggerhead shrike is listed by CDFW as a species of special concern. Loggerhead shrikes occur in dry, open habitats including grasslands, pastures with fence rows, agricultural fields, open woodlands (savannas), scrub, and riparian areas. They inhabit open areas with clear visibility for hunting, perches for scanning, and scattered small trees and large shrubs for nesting. Loggerhead shrikes typically avoid completely treeless and shrubless areas (Cade and Woods 1997), as well as urbanized and densely wooded areas (Grinnell and Miller 1944). Winter foraging habitat is similar to summer breeding and foraging habitat; however, shrikes also use idle pastures and hayfields during the winter (Bartgis 1992). The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Song Sparrow: Song sparrows are listed by CDFW as a species of special concern due to declining populations in the Great Central Valley of California. They prefer open grasslands with barren ground for foraging and tend to be found in areas with vegetation and scrub cover especially in grasslands and prairies. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Purple martin: Purple martin are listed by CDFW as a species of special concern. They inhabit woodlands, low elevation coniferous forest of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, and Monterey pine. They nest in old woodpecker cavities mostly, but also in human-made structures. Nests are often located in tall, isolated tree/snag. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Tricolored Blackbird: Tricolored blackbirds are listed by CDFW as a Threatened species. During the breeding season, tricolored blackbirds typically nest in dense colonies (some estimated as having 200,000+ nests), with males defending small territories and mating with one to four females. Studies have shown that nesting colonies are often located in seasonal wetlands with tules and cattails present. More recent studies indicate that nesting colonies are also regularly found in Himalayan blackberries (Rubus discolor) and grain fields. Other substrates where they have been observed nesting include giant European reed (Arundo donax), safflower (Carthamus tinctorius), tamarisk (Tamarix spp.), elderberry (Sambucus spp.), poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and riparian scrublands and forests (e.g., Salix, Populus, and Fraxinus spp.).

Tricolored blackbird foraging habitats in all seasons include annual grasslands, wet and dry vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands, agricultural fields (such as large tracts of alfalfa and pastures 451
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North with continuous haying schedules, and recently tilled fields), cattle feedlots, and dairies. They also forage occasionally in Mixed Riparian Scrub habitats along marsh borders. Weed-free row crops, intensively managed vineyards, and orchards do not serve as regular foraging sites (Beedy and Hamilton 1997, 1999; DeHaven 2000). The Project site does not contain suitable nesting habitat for this species.

Western yellow-billed cuckoo: Western yellow-billed cuckoo are CDFW listed as Endangered. They are found in riparian forest nester, along the broad, lower flood-bottoms of larger river systems.

They nest in riparian jungles of willow, often mixed with cottonwoods, with lower story of blackberry, nettles, or wild grape. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Yellow-headed blackbird. Yellow-headed blackbird are CDFW listed as a species of special concern.

They nest in freshwater emergent wetlands with dense vegetation and deep water. They are often found along borders of lakes or ponds and only nest where large insects, such as Odonata are abundant. Nesting is timed with maximum emergence of aquatic insects. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

SHORE/WATER BIRDS
Colonial nesting water birds, such as double-crested cormorant, great blue heron, and great egret, among others, are considered sensitive species. These species are not formally listed and protected pursuant to either the state or federal Endangered Species Acts. However, these species are of stated interest to CDFW and are protected by the MBTA. The colonial nesting water birds documented within the region are discussed individually below.

Black-crowned night heron: Black-crowned heron are protected by the MBTA. These colonial nesters usually nest in trees, occasionally in tule patches. Rookery sites are located adjacent to foraging areas and include lake margins, mud-bordered bays, and marshy spots. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Double-Crested Cormorant: Double-crested cormorant are protected by the MBTA. They are colonial nesters, which prefer to nest on coastal cliffs, offshore islands, and along lake margins in the interior of the state. This species nests along coast on sequestered islets, usually on ground with sloping surface, or in tall trees along lake margins. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Great Egret: Great egret are protected by the MBTA. These colonial nesters prefer to nest in large trees. Rookery sites are typically located near marshes, tide-flats, irrigated pastures, and margins of rivers and lakes. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

Great Blue Heron: Great blue heron are protected by the MBTA. These colonial nesters prefer to nest in tall trees, cliffsides, and sequestered spots on marshes. Rookery sites are typically located in close proximity to foraging areas, which include marshes, lake margins, tide-flats, rivers and streams, and wet meadows. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species. 452
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-27 Snowy Egret: Snowy egret are protected by the MBTA. These colonial nesters that prefer shallow water inlets for feeding, such as salt-marsh pools, tidal channels, and bays. They are found commonly along coastal areas and islands and during wintertime, they migrate and roost in the mangroves of the Caribbean. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

OTHER SENSITIVE BIRDS (GRUIFORMES)
The term “Gruiformes” means “crane-like” and there are a considerable number of Gruiformes bird families with a widespread geographical diversity.

Greater Sandhill Crane: Greater sandhill crane is listed as a CDFW threatened species, and is a SSHCP Covered Species. Greater sandhill cranes winter and use open agricultural habitats, natural vegetation communities, and seasonally managed wetlands. After the onset of winter rains, sandhill cranes begin foraging for invertebrates by probing soils in grassland habitats and overturning cattle dung. They also hunt for mice in taller grassland vegetation. They appear to avoid grassland habitats when vegetation exceeds 10 inches. Invertebrates are also consumed in natural and managed seasonal wetlands. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for this species.

California Black Rail: California black rail are listed by CDFW as a Threatened species. They inhabit freshwater marshes, wet meadows and shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger bays.

This species requires water depths of about one inch that do not fluctuate during the year and dense vegetation for nesting habitat. The Project site does not provide the appropriate aquatic habitat for this species.

Conclusion
Several bird species discussed above are protected under federal, state, or local regulations. The Project would result in the removal of an orchard, which is not high-quality nesting or foraging habitat for special-status birds. Powerlines and trees located in the region represent potentially suitable nesting habitat for a variety of special-status birds. Additionally, the agricultural land with low growing crops or grasslands represents potentially suitable nesting habitat for the groundnesting birds. In general, most nesting occurs from late February and early March through late July and early August, depending on various environmental conditions. The CNDDB does not provide any records of special status birds on the Project site, or in the immediate vicinity. Nevertheless, birds are highly mobile and can be expected to fly over the Project site at times. They could use the site for foraging, although it is not high-quality habitat for foraging. The Project site does not contain high quality nesting habitat for special status birds given that it is an orchard.

New sources of noise and light during the construction and operational phases of the project could adversely affect nesters if they located adjacent to the Project site in any given year. Additionally, the proposed Project would eliminate the open undeveloped land on the Project site, which could serve as limited foraging habitat for birds throughout the year. Mitigation Measure 3.4-1 requires preconstruction surveys for active nests of special-status birds and buffers around nests should they be identified during the surveys. Development of the proposed Project, with the Mitigation Measure

3.4-1, would ensure that potential impacts to special-status birds are reduced to a less than significant level.
453
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.4-1: The Project applicant shall implement the following measure to avoid or minimize impacts on other protected bird species that may occur on the site:
• Preconstruction surveys for active nests of special-status birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in all areas of suitable habitat within 500 feet of project disturbance.

Surveys shall be conducted within 14 days before commencement of any construction activities that occur during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31) in a given area. • If any active nests, or behaviors indicating that active nests are present, are observed, appropriate buffers around the nest sites shall be determined by a qualified biologist to avoid nest failure resulting from project activities. The size of the buffer shall depend on the species, nest location, nest stage, and specific construction activities to be performed while the nest is active. The buffers may be adjusted if a qualified biologist determines, based on these same considerations, that a change in buffer size would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. If buffers are adjusted, monitoring will be conducted to confirm that project activity is not resulting in detectable adverse effects on nesting birds or their young. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged or the nest site is otherwise no longer in use.

Impact 3.4-4: The proposed Project has the potential to result in direct or indirect effects on special-status mammal species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
According to the CNDDB, there are eight special-status mammal species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: American badger (Taxidea taxus), Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), San Joaquin pocket mouse (Perognathus inornatus), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), and western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus).

American badger, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, or San Joaquin pocket mouse: The Project site is frequently disturbed from active agricultural activities. As a result, the Project site does not contain high quality habitat for the American badger or Fresno kangaroo rat. American badger, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, or San Joaquin pocket mouse have not been documented within nine miles of the Project site. It is unlikely that the Project site is used by American badger, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, or San Joaquin pocket mouse and these species have not been observed during recent or previous field surveys. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on these species.

Special-status bats: The Project site provides potential habitat for fourspecial-status bats, including:
hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), and western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus). Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), and western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) are Species of Special Concern; hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) does not have a state or federal protection status. 454
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-29 Development of the Project site would eliminate foraging habitat for special-status bats by removing the agricultural areas. These special-status bat species, or evidence of bat presence (i.e. guano), were not observed during the field surveys and have not been documented on the Project site; therefore, they are not expected to be directly affected. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.4- 2 requires surveys for active maternity roosts if removal of suitable roosting areas (i.e., buildings, trees, shrubs, bridges, etc.) must occur during the bat pupping season (April 1 through July 31). If a special-status bat maternity roost is located, appropriate buffers around the roost sites would be required. Therefore, development of the proposed Project with Mitigation Measure 3.4.2, would ensure that potential impacts to special status bat species are reduced to a less than significant impact.

MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2: Prior to grading of each Project development phase, the Project applicant shall conduct a survey of the area to be graded for bat roosts, and if present, the Project applicant shall implement the following measures to avoid or minimize impacts on special-status bats:
• If removal of suitable roosting areas (i.e., buildings, trees, shrubs, bridges, etc.) must occur during the bat pupping season (April 1 through July 31), surveys for active maternity roosts shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The surveys shall be conducted from dusk until dark.
• If a special-status bat maternity roost is located, appropriate buffers around the roost sites shall be determined by a qualified biologist and implemented to avoid destruction or abandonment of the roost resulting from habitat removal or other project activities. The size of the buffer shall depend on the species, roost location, and specific construction activities to be performed in the vicinity. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until the end of the pupping season (August 1) or until a qualified biologist conforms the maternity roost is no longer active.
• If a non-maternal roost is located, eviction and exclusion techniques shall be conducted as recommended by the qualified biologist. Methods may include opening the roosting area to change the air flow and lighting, installing one-way doors, or other appropriate methods that allow the bats to exit and find a new roost. After eviction is believed to be completed, acoustic monitoring, and an evening emergence survey shall be performed by the qualified biologist to ensure eviction is complete. For tree removal, a two-step tree removal process involving removal of all branches that do not provide roosting habitat on the first day, and then the next day cutting down the remaining portion of the tree.

Impact 3.4-5: The proposed Project has the potential for direct or indirect effects on candidate, sensitive, or special-status plant species. (Less than Significant)
According to the CNDDB, there are 16 special-status plant species that are documented within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: bristly sedge (Carex comosa), California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus), California satintail (Imperata brevifolia), dwarf downingia (Downingia pusilla), forked hare-leaf (Lagophylla dichotoma), Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei), 455
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North hairy Orcutt grass (Orcuttia Pilosa), Hartweg's golden sunburst (Pseudobahia bahiifolia), Hoover's calycadenia (Calycadenia hooveri), Madera leptosiphon (Leptosiphon serrulatus), pincushion navarretia (Navarretia myersii ssp. Myersii), San Joaquin adobe sunburst (Pseudobahia peirsonii), San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis), Sanford's arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii), spiny-sepaled button-celery (Eryngium spinosepalum), and succulent owl's-clover (Castilleja campestris var. succulenta).

Of the 16 documented plant species, seven are federally listed species (California jewelflower, Greene’s tuctoria, hairy Orcutt grass, and Hartweg's golden sunburst, all endangered, and San Joaquin adobe sunburst, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, and succulent owl's-clover are all threatened) and seven are State listed species (California jewelflower, hairy Orcutt grass, Hartweg's golden sunburst, San Joaquin adobe sunburst, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, and succulent owl'sclover all endangered, while Greene’s tuctoria is rare). Additionally, 13 are CNPS 1B listed species and three are CNPS 2 listed species.

Field surveys/habitat evaluations for the entire Project site were performed on May 11, 2021 (De Novo Planning Group) and October 23, 2017 (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc.). The field survey performed by De Novo Planning Group coincided with the blooming period for special-status plants known to occur within the region. It was determined during the field survey the that the agricultural disturbance on the project site precludes the existence of special-status plants unless agricultural operations were to cease. The conditions of the Project site are highly disturbed due to the active agricultural operations. The site perimeter has a higher potential for plant growth that is not associated with the agricultural operations. This area was inspected during the field survey and special status plants were not observed. Therefore, development of the individual phases, and the proposed Project as a whole, will have a less than significant impact on special-status plants.

Impact 3.4-6: The proposed Project has the potential to effect protected wetlands and jurisdictional waters. (No Impact)
As noted previously, a query of the National Wetland Inventory Map does not show any stream, creeks, or wetland on the Study Area. The National Wetland Inventory Map code is “PUBHx,” which correlates to “palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded, excavated. Based on a review of historical records, readily available wetland mapping databases, and a site review, the field investigation completed as part of the Biological Habitat Assessment (Argonaut Ecological Consulting, Inc., 2018) confirmed the accuracy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wetland Inventory Map. No wetlands, waters, or any aquatic habitat is present within the Development Area.

There is a man-made conveyance channel (trapezoidal with no vegetation) located along the northern boundary, but outside the project limits.

The Project site does not contain protected wetlands or other jurisdictional areas and there is no need for permitting associated with the Federal or State Clean Water Acts. Absent any wetlands or jurisdictional waters, development of the proposed Project would have no impact relative to this topic.
456
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-31 Impact 3.4-7: The proposed Project has the potential to result in adverse effects on riparian habitat or a sensitive natural community. (Less than Significant)
The CNDDB record search revealed documented occurrences of five sensitive habitats within the nine-quadrangle region for the Project site, including: Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest, Northern Claypan Vernal Pool, and Sycamore Alluvial Woodland. None of these sensitive natural communities occur within the portion of the Project site. Additionally, there is no riparian habitat on the Project site. Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on riparian habitats or natural communities.

Impact 3.4-8: The proposed Project has the potential to result in interference with the movement of native fish or wildlife species or with established wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. (Less than Significant)
The CNDDB record search did not reveal any documented wildlife corridors or wildlife nursery sites on or adjacent to the Project site. Hardhead (Mylopharodon conocephalus) is the only special-status fish species documented within the region. The closest major natural movement corridor for native fish that are documented in the region is the San Joaquin River (which is dammed upstream at Millerton Lake), located approximately 5.4 miles to the west of the Project site.

The land uses within the Project site would not have any direct disturbance to the San Joaquin River or its tributaries, and therefore, would not have any direct disturbance to the movement corridor or habitat. Therefore, Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant level impact to any direct disturbance to the movement corridor or habitat.

Impact 3.4-9: The proposed Project has the potential to conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. (No Impact)
The proposed Project is not subject to a Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.4-10: The proposed Project has the potential to conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. (Less than Significant) The Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan establishes the following policy related to biological resources as listed below:

Open Space and Conservation Element Policies
Policy 2.6 Biological resources. Support the protection of biological resources through the conservation of high-quality habitat area.
457
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North o Consistent: This EIR includes an in-depth analysis of impacts for sensitive plants and wildlife, as well as habitat. Where impacts are identified, mitigation measures are presented to minimize and avoid to the extent practicable.

Municipal Code
Chapter 9.30, Tree Protection Standards, of the Clovis Municipal Code outlines protected trees, heritage trees, and tree removal permit/application requirements.

A. Heritage trees. Heritage trees in all zoning districts; B. Condition of approval. Any tree required to be planted or retained as a condition of approval of a development application or a building permit in all zoning districts; C. Multi-trunk trees. For multi-trunk trees, any tree which has at least one trunk twelve inches (12") or greater in diameter or thirty-eight inches (38") or greater in circumference, measured four feet (4') above the adjacent grade, except for developed single-family residential properties.

E. Parkway trees. Parkway trees and any tree located on public property.

Section 9.30.050, Exemptions, states that the following tree types and conditions are exempt from Chapter 9.30 and may be removed without approval of a tree removal permit:

C. Public utilities. Trees that undermine or impact the safe operation of public utilities.

D. Fruit trees. Fruit tree(s) in any zoning district.
458
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.4-33 E. Eucalyptus trees. All trees of the genus Myrtaceae.

F. Developed single-family residential. Any tree located on developed single-family residential property, except as specified in Section 9.30.040 (Protected trees). (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff.

October 8, 2014)
Further, Section 9.30.090, Replacement trees, outlines requirements for replacement trees.

The proposed Project requires the removal of the pecan orchard within the Development Area.

Pecan trees are fruit trees and are, thus, exempt from the tree removal and replacement requirements. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
459
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
460
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

SHEPHERD AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FOWLER AVE

RIORDAN AVE

COLE AVE

SUNNYSIDE AVEGLEN KIPPEN LN

BURL AVE
B
URGAN
AV
E

PIONEER AVE

PLUM TREE AVE

FOWLER AVE

WHITTIER AVE

GLEN ALVA LN

MARION AVE

ELM AVE

SHIRLEY AVE

ARGYLE AVE

ELM AVE

SHEPHERD AVE

EZIE AVE

VINTAGE AVE

LESTER AVE

LEXINGTON AVE

SUMMERSET AVE

PURDUE AVE

RUSSELL AVE

HEIRLOOM AVE

MC ARTHUR AVE PRESCOTT AVE

LESTER AVE

WINDMILL AVE

SERENA AVE

EDDY AVE

GLEN OBAN

PRESCOTT AVE LN RENN AVE

LOYOLA AVE

SPRINGTIME AVE

MARION AVE

BUNDY AVE

POWERS AVE

KELSO AVE

EVERGLADE AVE

FARMHOU

PHILLIP AVE SE AVE

SOLAR DR

VERMONT AVE

FRUITWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

GLEN DUNBAR LN

PROVINCE DR

LOYOLA AVE

POWERS AVE

PERRIN AVE

DUKE AVE

SERENA AVE

PURDUE AVE

TICONDEROGA DR

BLOOM AVE
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Developement Area
Clovis City Limits
Land Cover Types
Annual Grassland
Deciduous Orchard
Dryland Grain Crops
Evergreen Orchard
Irrigated Grain Crops
Irrigated Hayfield
Irrigated Row and Field Crops
Lacustrine
Riverine
Urban
Vineyard
Figure 3.4-1 Land Cover Types
Sources: Fresno County GIS; NRCS Soil Survey. Map date: May 8, 2023. 0 ±250 500
Feet

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
461
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
462
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

LANES BRIDGE FRIANT ACADEMY
ROUND

MOUNTAIN

FRESNO NORTH CLOVIS

FRESNO SOUTH MALAGA SANGER
LEGEND
Plant (80m)
Plant (specific)
Plant (non-specific)
Plant (circular)
Animal (80m)
Animal (specific)
Animal (non-specific)
Animal (circular)
Terrestrial Comm. (specific)
Terrestrial Comm. (non-specific)
Terrestrial Comm. (circular)
Multiple (80m)
Multiple (specific)
Multiple (non-specific)
Multiple (circular)
Sensitive EO's (Commercial only)
Figure 3.4-2. California Natural
Diversity Database
9-quad Search
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.
0 ±1 2
Miles

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
Project Location
463
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
464
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-1 This section provides a discussion of the prehistoric period background, ethnographic background, and historic period background, known cultural and tribal resources in the region, the regulatory setting, an impact analysis, and mitigation measures. Information in this section is derived primarily from the Cultural Resource Assessment for the Cultural Resource Overview for the North Shepherd Project, City of Clovis, California (Peak & Associates, Inc., January 12, 2023).

The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed Project was sent to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for review and comment on July 6, 2022. The NAHC provided comments on the proposed Project and a list of Native American contacts for consultation by the City of Clovis.

There were no comments received during the public review period for the NOP related to cultural resources.

KEY TERMS
The following key terms are used throughout this section to describe cultural and tribal resources and the framework that regulates them:

Archaeology. The study of historic or prehistoric peoples and their cultures by analysis of their artifacts and monuments.

Complex. A patterned grouping of similar artifact assemblages from two or more sites, presumed to represent an archaeological culture.

Ethnography. The study of contemporary human cultures.

Midden. A deposit marking a former habitation site and containing such materials as discarded artifacts, bone and shell fragments, food refuse, charcoal, ash, rock, human remains, structural remnants, and other cultural leavings.

3.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL SETTING
Prehistory
The Central Valley region was among the first in the state to attract intensive fieldwork, and research has continued to the present day. This has resulted in a substantial accumulation of data, but the emphasis has been in the northern portion of the valley. In the early decades of the 1900s, E.J. Dawson explored numerous sites near Stockton and Lodi, later collaborating with W.E. Schenck (Schenck and Dawson 1929). By 1933, the focus of work was directed to the Cosumnes locality, where survey and excavation were conducted by the Sacramento Junior College (Lillard and Purves 1936). Excavation data, in particular from the stratified Windmiller site (CA-SAC107), suggested two temporally distinct cultural traditions. Later work at other mounds by Sacramento Junior College and the University of California, Berkeley, enabled the investigators to identify a third cultural tradition, intermediate between the previously postulated Early and Late Horizons. The three-horizon sequence, based on discrete changes in ornamental artifacts and mortuary 465
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North practices, as well as on observed differences in soils within sites (Lillard, Heizer and Fenenga 1939), was later refined by Beardsley (1954). An expanded definition of artifacts diagnostic of each time period was developed, and its application extended to parts of the central California coast. Traits held in common allow the application of this system within certain limits of time and space to other areas of prehistoric central California.

In the southern San Joaquin Valley, with the exception of Hewes’s excavation at CA-FRE-48 (the Tranquility Site), the foci of early investigations have been the old shorelines of the interior lakes; Tulare, Kern, and Buena Vista. In 1899, Dr. P. M. Jones directed fieldwork in the Buena Vista-Tulare Lake area of Kern County. Jones investigated 150 mounds and conducted trenching of several sites including CA-KER-53. In 1909, N. C. Nelson investigated prehistoric Site CA-KER-49, which is located to the west of Buena Vista Lake. Later, four surveys and excavations were conducted in the same locale under the auspices of the University of California. A compilation of these investigation results was published in 1926 by Gifford and Schenck.

As a result of this early work, an elaborate culture complex was defined for the late prehistoric period. This complex can be ascribed probably to the Yokuts and their direct ancestors. The material culture of this late temporal period complex included steatite vessels and beads, finelymade projectile points, pottery, shaped stone mortars, Tivela disc beads, use of asphaltum, and the presence of metates and manos. Flexed burials were the predominant interment mode.

Earlier complexes underlying the late cultural expressions were represented by chipped stone crescents, large projectile points, atlatl spurs, and weights. Mortuary practices, generally thought to be related, include extended rather than flexed burial position, a situation analogous to that of the northern valley (Gifford and Schenck 1926; Lillard, Heizer, and Fenenga 1939; Moratto 1972). 20 Presence of “Early Man,” although not found in direct association with extinct animals, is demonstrated by the frequency of chipped stone crescents and fluted points similar to those of the Clovis-Folsom Complex in the American Southwest. Although fluted points have been found near the shores of Tulare Lake, an area that has also produced surface finds of extinct mammal bone of Pleistocene age, the association is not substantiated by controlled excavations and remains speculative (Riddell and Olsen 1969). Most of the point collection had been acquired by D. Witt over a period of 30 years.

Under the direction of Wedel (1941), the Civil Works Administration, in conjunction with the Smithsonian Institution, initiated the first major excavations using stratigraphic controls.

Investigations of CA-KER-39 and CA-KER-60 as well as several smaller sites near Buena Vista Lake produced evidence of two distinct cultural entities or occupation periods. Wedel lacked methods for dating these two entities by cross-comparison of the assemblages, he tentatively stated that the early occupation at Buena Vista Lake appeared to be temporally older and less developed than the Early Horizon (Windmiller Pattern) of the Delta region. He compared this early component to the Oak Grove or Milling Stone culture of the Santa Barbara area (Rogers 1939). He divided the later cultural entity into two distinct phases, both clearly distinguished from the earlier cultural phase by artifact types. Wedel (1941:144-145) estimated that neither of these cultural periods exceeded 1500 B.P. (years Before the Present). Later, other investigators proposed far earlier ages 466
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-3 for these early occupations, with dates ranging from 2000 to 7000 B.P. (Baumhoff and Olmstead 1963, 1964; Heizer 1964; Meighan 1959).

Later investigations in 1963 and 1964 at CA-KER-116 near Buena Vista Lake produced materials similar to Wedel’s early occupation. These materials occurred in the lower levels of the “upper deposit,” while an even deeper cultural deposit yielded materials similar to those of the San Dieguito Complex. Artifacts included a chipped stone crescent, crude point fragments, and an atlatl spur. Radiocarbon age determinations on shell from the lowest cultural levels returned a date of circa 8200 B.P. (Fredrickson and Grossman 1966, 1977; Fredrickson 1967).

Despite the previously mentioned investigations, the prehistory of the southern San Joaquin remains as yet poorly understood, without a tightly defined chronological sequence of cultural development.

Ethnography
Ethnographic literature is often uncertain in definition of cultural boundaries for Indian groups.

Early displacement by white intrusion resulted in population shifts to avoid conflict with the Spanish, and later with the miners and settlers. The ravages of disease and warfare decimated the native people, further weakening cultural identity. Informants were often uncertain of original territories of the various tribal groupings.

The Foothill Yokuts were members of the Penutian language family which held all of the Central Valley, San Francisco Bay Area, and the Pacific Coast from Marin County to near Point Sur. The Yokuts differed from other ethnographic groups in California as they had true tribal divisions with group names (Kroeber 1925). Each tribe spoke a particular dialect, common to its members, but similar enough to other Yokuts that they were mutually intelligible (Kroeber 1925).

The Foothill Yokuts were a group of about 15 named tribes who occupied the western Sierra Nevada foothills from the Fresno River to the Kern River. A further subdivision separated the groups into northern, central and southern groups. The area controlled by individual groups varied over time. There is no information to indicate that there was a village in the project vicinity, but this does not preclude the possibility. Trade was well developed, with mutually beneficial interchange of needed or desired goods. Obsidian, rare in the San Joaquin Valley, was obtained by trade with Paiute and Shoshoni groups on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada, where numerous sources of this material are located, and to some extent from the Napa Valley to the north. Shell beads, obtained by the Yokuts from coastal people, and acorns, rare in the Great Basin, were among many items exported to the east by Yokuts traders (Davis 1961).

Economic subsistence was based on the acorn, with substantial dependency on gathering and processing of wild seeds and other vegetable foods. The rivers, streams, and sloughs which formed a maze within the valley provided abundant food resources such as fish, shellfish, and turtles.

Game, wild fowl, and small mammals were trapped and hunted to provide protein augmentation of the diet. In general, the eastern portion of the San Joaquin Valley provided a lush environment of varied food resources, with the estimated large population centers reflecting this abundance (Cook 1955; Baumhoff 1963).
467
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Settlements were oriented along the water ways, with their village sites normally placed adjacent to these features for their nearby water and food resources. House structures varied in size and shape (Latta 1949; Kroeber 1925). The housepit depressions ranged in diameter from between 3 to 18 meters.

Latta (1949:99) reported that a village of 200 to 300 Yokuts might have four or five large houses that were used for ten or twelve years or until a family member died, at which time the Indians burned the house in which the death had occurred. If a sick or aged person died outside the dwelling, the family did not burn the house. When a Northern Yokuts died, the body was cremated or buried in a flexed position. Southern tribes normally buried their dead, although they did cremate shamans, persons who died away from their village and, among the Tachi, persons of great importance.

The Yokuts experienced severe depopulation after contact with the Spanish and subsequent explorers. The most devastating impacts of the Spanish colonization effort were not the result of military conflicts, but came from Old World diseases newly introduced to the native people.

Historical Background

EARLY EXPLORATIONS
The early recorded inhabitants of the region were members of the Yokuts tribe. Although the Spanish missions were established closer to the Pacific coast between 1769 and 1817, the general Project area was first visited in the early 1800s by Spanish explorers, who visited the San Joaquin Valley with three goals: to search for runaway neophytes from the missions in the coastal regions, to punish the Indian raiders, and to select sites for new missions. In 1806, a group led by Gabriel Moraga and Father Pedro Muñoz, left Mission San Juan Bautista heading north to about the Mokelumne River. They then turned south, and travelled along the edge of the mountains crossing the San Joaquin River and passing through Tejon Pass, arriving at Mission San Fernando. In 1815, José Dolores Pico marched an expedition group from Monterey into the region. Following the San Joaquin River, he passed through the area in search of runaways, traveling as far south as the Kern River. The expedition returned to the starting point in Monterey with nine prisoners and a number of horses.

After control of California passed from Spain to Mexico in 1822, Mexican explorations into the interior continued, with José Dolores Pico conducting a major expedition along the San Joaquin River in 1825-1826. This expedition was considered successful in that some neophytes were captured, hostile Indians killed, some of the tribal groups intimidated, and some stolen horses recovered. In 1828, Sebastián Rodríguez led a similar expedition into the same region. His expedition captured a number of neophytes as well as some of the stolen horses, an item that had become an important dietary staple for the Indian tribes in the San Joaquin Valley region (Beck and Haase 1974).

The expeditions did not leave physical evidence, but there were definitely effects to the Native American populations. Causing even more of an effect on the native population were the diseases brought in to the Native populations of the Central Valley in the early 1830s. 468
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-5

RANCHOS
In Fresno County, there was only one early land grant, a rancho along the current southern border of the county: Laguna de Tache. The era of the Spanish and Mexican land grants did not directly affect the Project area.

CLOVIS
The extension of the railroad system throughout the San Joaquin Valley allowed the increased expansion of a market for the agricultural production of the region. A branch line of the Southern Pacific Railroad (first known as the Pollasky Railroad or the San Joaquin Railroad) was built through this region circa 1891. Marcus Pollasky served as the promoter, and monies were raised locally for the construction costs. Clovis Cole, the owner of the large wheat ranch, donated land for the route, and a station was established here on the line and named Clovis (Gudde 1969; City of Clovis 1962).

After the completion of the railroad, the construction of the flume from Shaver Lake to the east was soon completed by the Fresno Flume and Irrigation Company. The 45-mile-long flume could deliver 200,000 board feet of lumber through the vee-shaped watercourse in a 24-hour period. At the end of the flume, there was a finishing and distributing plant. Other, better grade lumber was delivered to Clovis down Tollhouse Grade, hauled by ox and horse teams. In the early years, 140 men were employed by the lumber company, with an annual payroll of $450,000. The Clovis lumber plant occupied a 40 acre site. The factory, warehouse, (lumber) planing mill and engine house all burned to the ground in 1898, but were soon rebuilt. As many as 400 men were employed by the company. The mill was located on the south side of Fifth Street (City of Clovis 1962; Clovis Centennial Book Committee 2011).

The mill in Clovis produced “ordinary lines of lumber,” shakes, trays, sweat boxes, raisin boxes, orange boxes, cedar posts, ties, poles, and also pine and oak cordwood (Fresno Republican 1897:
96). The ever increasing agricultural use of the San Joaquin Valley, due to improvements and expansion of irrigation systems, led to a large market for the fruit packing boxes, allowing shipment of the produce to a wider marketplace.

Clovis was laid out by a licensed surveyor, working for the co-owners of the land: Clovis Cole, Clarence Pallos and George Owen. Early homes were utilitarian, and the streets were ungraded (City of Clovis 1962).

The town’s population expanded rapidly from about 500 residents in 1905 to about 1,000 in 1910.

Nearby, the population was increasing within the local rural agricultural colonies, with large acreages broken up into 20 acre tracts advertised for sale to Midwesterners. By 1919, local population had grown to 1,500. At this point, the lumber business is still the main support of the economy, but the area produced huge crops of Malaga grapes and figs (Clovis Centennial Book Committee 2011; Vandor 1919:269).

For the first 21 years, there was no organized government in Clovis. Late in 1911, an election was held, and the City incorporated in 1912. Most of the early businesses in town were located on Front Street, now known as Clovis Avenue, on the west side of the tracks (City of Clovis 1962). 469
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AREA
The early use of land in the Big Dry Creek region was for cultivation of wheat. Improvements such as the development of the railroad, allowing marketing of more perishable crops, and irrigation canals, providing a steady source of water year round, also encouraged the growth of crops such as grapes. The establishment of orchards and vineyards allowed more profitability with smaller tracts of land, and many pieces of land were subdivided as portions of agricultural colonies.

Much of the Project site is a portion a 160-acre tract first acquired by Rebecca Wilson Norman Strother in 1873 as a land patent. Strother had been born in Mississippi in 1818, and had eight daughters and one son, who died as a child, with her husband. He died in Mississippi in 1868, and she travelled west to Fresno County. Mrs. Strother apparently did not reside on the land, but likely transferred ownership to one of her daughters who did choose to live in the region.

In 1880, Mrs. Strother lived in Santa Rosa with two of her unmarried daughters (Federal census 1880). Her will was prepared at this time, leaving her estate to the two unmarried daughters, and specifically excluding the married daughters. She died in 1883.

One of the daughters, Laura Strother, also acquired land in the area, the land immediately north of the Project site consisting of the northwest quarter of section 21.

William Shipp was married to a Strother daughter, Mary. He brought his family to California in 1868. The Shipps acquired large tracts of land in the Big Dry Creek area, and ran large herds of sheep. It appears that this land may have been part of the Shipp place.

Early maps show the Enterprise Canal near the Project Area. The Enterprise Canal had been constructed by 1891, south of the Project site (Thompson 1891).

In 1891, R. T. Owen owned the south half of section 21, including the land of the Project site. In 1892, he lived in the Temperance Township according to voter records, so it cannot be certain where precisely he lived without further research.

Owen, his father and brother had been farmers and ranchers in the area. He continued to raise grain in the region until 1902. The 1891 map shows a building to the east of the current building on Owen’s holding. A 1919 biography describes the R.T. Owen residence as “the first fine house in Clovis,” suggesting he lived closer to the early townsite after he sold the Project area.

By 1907, the south half of section 21 and the northeast quarter of the section had been acquired by Hugh Bissell (Official County Map 1907).

Hugh Bissell, a native of Iowa, had farmed for a number of years in Missouri, and came to California in 1885. He first settled in Modesto, then a year later, moved to Fresno County. He had a ranch near Fresno, that he sold in 1898. He leased a tract of about 3,000 acres for dry grain farming. He quit grain farming in 1906, and purchased 320 acres of what was known as the Shipp place for $20 an acre. Bissell also purchased the northeast quarter of the section, so his ranch totaled 480 acres.

Bissell wanted to improve the land for intensive farming, so he sank wells and found that the water readily came to the ground surface. Even though others thought it impossible, he installed a 470
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-7 pumping plant for irrigation. With a six-inch centrifugal pump, run by a twenty-horsepower engine, he was able to irrigate the land, and set up the first vineyard above the ditch. He made a success of the vineyard and the orchard on the property, later irrigated by a total of three pumping plants (Vandor 1919; Official Map of Fresno County 1907).

In 1910, the residents of the Project Area included High Bissell, a widower since 1908, his daughterin-law (widowed in 1909), his grandson William, son Ralph, six hired men, and a house servant (Federal Census 1910). It is not certain where the residents were housed on the property. The large residence appears to date to about 1915.

At various points, Bissell sold off portions of the ranch, and in 1919, had 160 acres, including the much of the Project site. The land had increased in value from $20 an acre to $750 an acre.

In a 1919 biography, Bissell was credited with having developed “a wonderfully productive and valuable place, and erecting a large comfortable residence, constructed of cement blocks, making it one of the show places of the district.”
As well as his involvement in viticulture and horticulture, Bissell served as a director for the National Bank of Clovis. Bissell also served with various groups related to the production of raisins (Vandor 1919).

The family remained on the property until an unknown date. By 1920, Hugh Bissell had moved to Fresno. By 1930, his son Raymond had moved with his family to Madera. The later history of ownership and use of the residence is not known.

PROJECT SETTING
Project Site
The Project site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line at the northeast corner of North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue. The Project site is bounded on the north by Perrin Road, on the east by North Fowler Avenue, on the south by East Shepherd Avenue, and on the west by North Sunnyside Avenue. The Project site is in the southwest quadrant of Section 21, Township 12 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM).

The Project site includes several distinct planning boundaries. The following terms are used throughout this document to describe planning area boundaries within the Project site:
• Project Area – Includes the whole of the Project site (approximately 155 acres), encompassing the approximate 77-acre Development Area and the approximate 78-acre Non-Development Area.
o Development Area - Includes the parcels being annexed that will be entitled for subdivision and development. This will include a Sphere of Influence Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Pre-zone, Annexation, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, and Residential Site Plan Review.
471
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North o Non-Development Area - Includes the parcels being included in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development.

This includes two separate areas, each described as an Expansion SubArea. The two Expansion SubAreas total 78 acres and are defined as Expansion SubArea North and Expansion SubArea East.

The Project site is approximately 155 acres and includes 39 Assessor parcels (APNs). The Project site is relatively flat and is approximately 385 feet above mean sea level.

The Development Area primarily contains farmland. Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use.

Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the east-west centerline of the area, one located in the southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foot-tall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

The Non-Development Area is located within the City of Clovis’ Planning Area but is outside of the City’s existing Sphere of Influence and contains existing single-family residences . Each SubArea is uniquely different and is described below:
• Expansion SubArea North: Includes single-family residences that are accessed by North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue. North Purdue Avenue and East Lexington Avenue are unimproved roadways with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping. North Sunnyside Avenue located to the west and Perrin Road to the north are also unimproved County roadways. There are 18 APNs in SubArea North. • Expansion SubArea East: Includes single-family residences and agricultural fields located between the Project Site and North Fowler Avenue. North Fowler Avenue is a two-lane unimproved County roadway with no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping.

There are 18 APNs in SubArea East.

Surrounding Uses
The Project site is surrounded by a variety of residential land uses. Uses immediately adjacent to the north and east boundary of the Project site include rural residential uses on larger lots, some having small orchards. Uses to the south of the Project site contain a mix of residential uses, as well as rural residential on larger lots and medium-high density residential in a developed smaller lot residential subdivision. West of the Project site is an electrical power substation and a graded area that is being prepared for additional residential development. 472
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-9

KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES
A summary of the record search, field survey, and Native American consultation that was performed for the Project site is included below.

Records Search
A record search has been conducted for the North Shepherd Project site and a 0.25-mile radius through the South San Joaquin Valley Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) (RS#22-461, Appendix 2). The Project area includes one recorded resource, P-10-07197. Formerly, the site was a 1909 residence, recorded in 2017 by Peak & Associates. The residence has been removed from the property, and the former location appears to lie in a non-development area, not proposed for housing. Within the search area radius, there are three recorded resources, all historic period resources. They include: P-10-005511, two branches of the Helm Colonial Ditch; P10-005934, a section of the Enterprise Canal; and P-10- 007198, a residence at 4707 N. Preuss Avenue.

Field Survey
Peak & Associates conducted a complete, intensive survey of the Project Site in 2017 (FR-3009), recording the historic residence at the southern boundary. One other negative survey for a cell tower was conducted by Lossee in 2006 (FR-02285) in the eastern portion of the Project site. Four other surveys have also been reported within the Project site. Bissonette’s 1993 survey is shown to have included hundreds of acres of land in the region including the Project site. However, as noted in the Cultural Assessment, the survey was not plotted correctly by the SSJVC, in part due to the lack of a survey coverage map in the report (FR-01219). Bissonette has noted the survey only spent two days doing fieldwork and walked along the pipelines and channel routes with transects and within a five meter radius of proposed culverts. Varner reportedly surveyed the major portion of the Development Area in 2001 with negative findings. He did note the presence of the historic building (FR-02203), but did not record it during his survey.

NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
The Project includes an amendment to the General Plan, triggering the need for tribal consultation pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18. Pursuant to SB 18, consultation letters were sent via certified mail by the City of Clovis, requesting information related to cultural resources or heritage sites within the Project Site. The letters were sent to the twelve tribal representatives listed in the NAHC response, including: Elizabeth Kipp, Chairperson of the Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians; Timothy Perez of the North Valley Yokuts Tribe; Carol Bill, Chairperson of the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians; Claudia Gonzales, Chairwoman of the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians; Robert Ledger, Chairperson of the Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government; Brenda Lavell, Chairpersonof the Table Mountain Rancheria; Stan Alec of the Kings River Choinumni Farm Tribe; David Alvarez, Chairperson of the Traditional Choinumni Tribe; Elaine Fink, Chairperson of the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians; Neil Peyron, Chairperson of the Tule River Indian Tribe; Katherine Perez, Chairperson of the North Valley Yokuts Tribe; and Kenneth 473
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Woodrow, Chairperson of the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The City received a response from the Table Mountain Rancheria declining participation, but requesting notification in the event that cultural resources are discovered on the Project site. All consultation correspondence and a contact log are provided in Appendix E.

3.5.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act was enacted in 1966 as a means to protect cultural resources that are eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The law sets forth criterion that is used to evaluate the eligibility of cultural resources. The NRHP is composed of districts, sites, buildings, structures, objects, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture that are significant to American History.

Virtually any physical evidence of past human activity can be considered a cultural resource.

Although not all such resources are considered to be significant and eligible for listing, they often provide the only means of reconstructing the human history of a given site or region, particularly where there is no written history of that area or that period. Consequently, their significance is judged largely in terms of their historical or archaeological interpretive values. Along with research values, cultural resources can be significant, in part, for their aesthetic, educational, cultural and religious values.

National Register of Historic Places
The eligibility criteria for the NRHP are as follows (36 CFR 60.4):

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess aspects of integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, association, and
(A) that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and cultural heritage; or (B) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (C) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (D) that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
474
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-11 American Indian Religious Freedom Act and Native American Graves and Repatriation Act
The American Indian Religious Freedom Act recognizes that Native American religious practices, sacred sites, and sacred objects have not been properly protected under other statutes. It establishes as national policy that traditional practices and beliefs, sites (including right of access), and the use of sacred objects shall be protected and preserved. Additionally, Native American remains are protected by the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act of 1990.

Other Federal Legislation
Historic preservation legislation was initiated by the Antiquities Act of 1966, which aimed to protect important historic and archaeological sites. It established a system of permits for conducting archaeological studies on federal land, as well as setting penalties for noncompliance.

This permit process controls the disturbance of archaeological sites on federal land. New permits are currently issued under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979. The purpose of ARPA is to enhance preservation and protection of archaeological resources on public and Native American lands. The Historic Sites Act of 1935 declared that it is national policy to "Preserve for public use historic sites, buildings, and objects of national significance." STATE
California Register of Historic Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) was established in 1992 and codified in the Public Resource Code §5020, 5024 and 21085. The law creates several categories of properties that may be eligible for the CRHR. Certain properties are included in the program automatically, including: properties listed in the NRHP; properties eligible for listing in the NRHP; and certain classes of State Historical Landmarks. Determining the CRHR eligibility of historic and prehistoric properties is guided by CCR §§15064.5(b) and Public Resources Code (PRC) §§21083.2 and 21084.1.

Cultural resources, under CRHR guidelines, are defined as buildings, sites, structures, or objects that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or scientific importance. A cultural resource may be eligible for listing on the CRHR if it:
• is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;
• is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; • embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual or possesses high artistic values; or
• has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 provides guidance for determining the significance of impacts to archaeological and historical resources. Demolition or material alteration of a historical resource, 475
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North including archaeological sites, is generally considered a significant impact. Determining the CRHR eligibility of historic and prehistoric properties is guided by CCR §§15064.5(b) and Public Resources Code (PRC) §§21083.2 and 21084.1.

CEQA also provides for the protection of Native American human remains (CCR §15064.5[d]).

Native American human remains are also protected under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 USC 3001 et seq.), which requires federal agencies and certain recipients of federal funds to document Native American human remains and cultural items within their collections, notify Native American groups of their holdings, and provide an opportunity for repatriation of these materials. This act also requires plans for dealing with potential future collections of Native American human remains and associated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony that might be uncovered as a result of development projects overseen or funded by the federal government.

If a prehistoric or historic period cultural resource does not meet any of the four CRHR criteria, but does meet the definition of a “unique” site as outlined in PRC §21083.2, it may still be treated as a significant resource if it is: an archaeological artifact, object or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
• it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information, • it has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type, or
• it is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event.

California Health and Safety Code
§§7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the California Native American Heritage Commission. The CEQA Guidelines (§§15064.5) specify the procedures to be followed in case of the discovery of human remains on non-federal land. The disposition of Native American burials falls within the jurisdiction of the NAHC.

Senate Bill 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes 2004)
SB 18, authored by Senator John Burton and signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2004, requires local (city and county) governments to consult with California Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal cultural places (“cultural places”) through local land use planning. This legislation, which amended §§65040.2, §§65092, §§65351, §§65352, and §§65560, and added §§65352.3, §§653524, and §§65562.5 to the Government Code; also requires the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to include in the General Plan Guidelines advice to local governments for how to conduct these consultations. The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use 476
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-13 decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places. These consultation and notice requirements apply to adoption and amendment of both general plans (defined in Government Code §§65300 et seq.) and specific plans (defined in Government Code §§65450 et seq.).

Assembly Bill 978
In 2001, Assembly Bill (AB) 978 expanded the reach of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 and established a state commission with statutory powers to assure that federal and state laws regarding the repatriation of Native American human remains and items of patrimony are fully complied with. In addition, AB 978 also included non-federally recognized tribes for repatriation.

Assembly Bill 52
AB 52, approved in September 2014, creates a formal role for California Native American tribes by creating a formal consultation process and establishing that a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource has a significant effect on the environment. Tribal cultural resources are defined as:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:

A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC §§5020.1(k). 2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC §§5024.1 (c). In applying the criteria set forth in PRC §§5024.1 (c) the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

A cultural landscape that meets the criteria above is also a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. In addition, a historical resource described in PRC §§21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in PRC §§21083.2(g), or a “non-unique archaeological resource” as defined in PRC §§21083.2(h) may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with above criteria.

AB 52 requires a lead agency, prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report for a project, to begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project if: (1) the California Native American tribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency through formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe, and (2) the California Native American tribe responds, in writing, within 30 days of receipt of the formal notification, and requests the consultation.
477
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North

3.5.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project is considered to have a significant impact on cultural or tribal cultural resources if it will:
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section15064.5;
• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5;
• Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
o Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k);
o A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resources to a California Native American tribe.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.5-1 Project implementation has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change to a significant historical or archaeological resource, as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The Project site encompasses approximately 155 acres, encompassing the approximate 77-acre Development Area and the approximate 78-acre Non-Development Area. The Development Area Includes the parcels being annexed into the City of Clovis that will be entitled for subdivision and development. This will include a Sphere of Influence Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Prezone, Annexation, Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, and Residential Site Plan Review. The Non-Development Area Includes the parcels being included in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) expansion that will not be entitled for subdivision or development. This includes two separate areas, each described as an Expansion SubArea.

The Development Area primarily contains farmland. Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use. The Non-Development Area is located within the City of Clovis’ Planning Area but is outside of the City’s existing Sphere of Influence and contains existing single-family residences. 478
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-15 The Project site is not located in an area known to have historical and archaeological resources.

However, as with most projects in the region that involve ground-disturbing activities, there is the potential for discovery of a previously unknown historical and archaeological resources.

Implementation of the following Mitigation Measure would ensure that this potential impact is less than significant.

MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.5-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural, historical, archaeological, tribal, and/or human in origin are discovered during construction and/or ground disturbance, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. A Native American Representative from traditionally and culturally affiliated Native American Tribes that requested consultation shall be immediately contacted and invited to assess the significance of the find and make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment, as necessary. If deemed necessary by the City, a qualified cultural resources specialist meeting the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology, may also assess the significance of the find in joint consultation with Native American Representatives to ensure that Tribal values are considered.

Work at the discovery location cannot resume until it is determined by the City, in consultation with culturally affiliated tribes, that the find is not a tribal cultural resource, or that the find is a tribal cultural resource and all necessary investigation and evaluation of the discovery under the requirements of the CEQA, including AB 52, has been satisfied. The qualified cultural resources specialist shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgement.

The following notifications and measures shall apply to potential unique archaeological resources and potential historical resources of an archaeological nature (as opposed to tribal cultural resources), depending on the nature of the find:
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource that might qualify as a unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource that might qualify as a unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the City and applicable landowner. The professional archaeologist and a representative from the City shall consult to determine whether any unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature are present, in part based on a finding of eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. If it is determined that unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature are present, the qualified archaeologist shall develop mitigation or treatment measures for consideration and approval by the City. Mitigation shall be developed and implemented in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 and Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, with a preference for preservation in place. Consistent with Section 479
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place may be accomplished through planning construction to avoid the resource; incorporating the resource within open space; capping and covering the resource; or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. If approved by the City, such measures shall be implemented and completed prior to commencing further work for which grading or building permits were issued, unless otherwise directed by the City. Avoidance or preservation of unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature shall not be required where such avoidance or preservation in place would preclude the construction of important structures or infrastructure or require exorbitant expenditures, as determined by the City. Where avoidance or preservation are not appropriate for these reasons, the professional archaeologist, in consultation with the City, shall prepare a detailed recommended a treatment plan for consideration and approval by the City, which may include data recovery. If employed, data recovery strategies for unique archaeological resources that do not also qualify as historical resources of an archaeological nature shall follow the applicable requirements and limitations set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Data recovery will normally consist of (but would not be limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim of recovering important scientific data contained within the unique archaeological resource or historical resource of an archaeological nature. The data recovery plan shall include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and State repositories, libraries, and interested professionals. If data recovery is determined by the City to not be appropriate, then an equally effective treatment shall be proposed and implemented. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the City, in consultation with the professional archaeologist, determines that the site either: 1) does not contain unique archaeological resources or historical resources of an archaeological nature; or 2) that the preservation and/or treatment measures have been completed to the satisfaction of the City.
• If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the contractor shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the County Coroner (per §7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of §7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, then the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the project (§5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, then the NAHC can mediate (§5097.94 of the Public Resources Code). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code).

This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information 480
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES 3.5
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.5-17 Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agency, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Impact 3.5-2: Project implementation has the potential to disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
Indications suggest that humans have occupied Fresno County for over 10,000 years and it is not always possible to predict where human remains may occur outside of formal burials. Therefore, excavation and construction activities, regardless of depth, may yield human remains that may not be interred in marked, formal burials.

Under CEQA, human remains are protected under the definition of archaeological materials as being “any evidence of human activity.” Additionally, Public Resources Code Section 5097 has specific stop-work and notification procedures to follow in the event that human remains are inadvertently discovered during Project implementation.

While no human remains were found during field surveys of the Project site, implementation of the Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 would ensure that all construction activities which inadvertently discover human remains implement state-required consultation methods to determine the disposition and historical significance of any discovered human remains. Mitigation Measure 3.5- 1 provides the appropriate procedures if subsurface deposits believed to be human in origin are discovered during construction and/or ground disturbance. This would include all work being halted within a 100-foot radius of the discovery in order for the appropriately qualified professionals to evaluate the find and provide recommendations on how to proceed. If the appropriately qualified professional determines that the find is not human remains, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required. However, if the appropriately qualified professional determines that the find is human remains, procedures are outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 on how to proceed to ensure that the County Coroner is contacted for an evaluation, and appropriate mitigation or treatment measures are developed based on the findings of the coroner. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 as previously stated, would ensure that the potential to disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, would be reduced to a less than significant level. 481
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

3.5-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Impact 3.5-3: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, and that is: Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or a resource determined by the lead agency (Less than Significant with Mitigation) As described under the Consultation heading above, the City of Clovis sent outreach letters to the twelve tribal representatives listed in the NAHC response, including: Elizabeth Kipp, Chairperson of the Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians; Timothy Perez of the North Valley Yokuts Tribe; Carol Bill, Chairperson of the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians; Claudia Gonzales, Chairwoman of the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians; Robert Ledger, Chairperson of the Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government; Brenda Lavell, Chairpersonof the Table Mountain Rancheria; Stan Alec of the Kings River Choinumni Farm Tribe; David Alvarez, Chairperson of the Traditional Choinumni Tribe; Elaine Fink, Chairperson of the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians; Neil Peyron, Chairperson of the Tule River Indian Tribe; Katherine Perez, Chairperson of the North Valley Yokuts Tribe; and Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson of the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. All consultation correspondence and a contact log are provided in Appendix E.

While no specific resources have been identified through consultation with affiliated tribes, it is possible that unknown tribal cultural resources may be present within the Development Area. The Proposed Project would be required to follow development requirements, including compliance with local policies, ordinances, and applicable permitting procedures related to protection of tribal resources. Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 has been incorporated to provide the appropriate procedures ifsubsurface deposits believed to be tribal resources, and/or human in origin are discovered during construction and/or ground disturbance. This would include all work being halted within a 100- foot radius of the discovery in order for the appropriately qualified professionals to evaluate the find and provide recommendations on how to proceed. If the appropriately qualified professional determines that the find does not represent a resource that might qualify as a tribal resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required. However, if the appropriately qualified professional determines that the find does represent a resource that might qualify as a tribal resource, procedures are outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 on how to proceed to ensure that the resource is evaluated, and appropriate mitigation or treatment measures are developed.

As discussed under Impacts 3.5-1 through 3.5-2, development of the proposed project could impact unknown archaeological resources including Native American Tribal artifacts and human remains. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 would ensure that the potential impact to tribal resources, including human remains, would be reduced to a less than significant level. 482
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-1 The purpose of this section is to disclose and analyze the potential impacts associated with the geology of the Project site and regional vicinity, and to analyze issues such as the potential exposure of people and property to geologic hazards, landform alteration, and erosion. This section is based in part on the following:
• 2014 Clovis General Plan (Placeworks, 2014);
• 2014 Clovis General Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Placeworks, 2014); • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2022); • Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed Tract 6205 (Spensley Property) Sunnyside and Shepherd Avenues Clovis, California (Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2019) (Appendix F); and • Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2018).

3.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

GEOLOGIC SETTING
Geomorphic Province
The City of Clovis, including the Project site, is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California. The Great Valley Province is a broad structural trough bounded by the tilted block of the Sierra Nevada on the east and the complexly folded and faulted Coast Ranges on the west. The San Joaquin River is the principal river in the area and is located just north and west of the City. Alluvial fans formed by this river are the largest geomorphic features in the Clovis area. The formation of the fans has resulted in rather flat regional topography.

Regional Geology
The Project site lies in the San Joaquin Valley in central California. The San Joaquin Valley is a topographically flat, northwest-trending, structural trough (or basin). It is bordered by the Tehachapi Mountains on the south, the Sierra Nevada on the east, the Coast Ranges on the west, and the beginning of the Sacramento Valley to the north.

The San Joaquin Valley is filled with thick sedimentary rock sequences that were deposited as much as 130 million years ago. Large alluvial fans have developed on each side of the Valley. The larger and more gently sloping fans are on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley and overlie metamorphic and igneous basement rocks. These basement rocks are exposed in the Sierra Nevada foothills and consist of meta-sedimentary, volcanic, and granitic rocks.

Local Setting
The Project site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line at the northeast corner of North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd Avenue. The Project site is bounded on the north by Perrin Road, on the east by North Fowler Avenue, on the south by East Shepherd Avenue, and on the west by North Sunnyside Avenue. The Project site is in the southwest quadrant of Section 21, Township 12 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM). The Project site is relatively flat and is approximately 385 feet above mean sea level. 483
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North The Development Area primarily contains farmland. Three residential dwellings and a warehouse were removed in approximately 2020. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use. Five agricultural water wells are located in the Development Area; two located along the eastwest centerline of the area, one located in the southwestern corner of the area, one located in the northwestern corner of the area and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. Four pole-mounted transformers are located in the Development Area; two are located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area and two are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area in the southern portion. Two 10-12-foot-tall berms containing wood branches and debris from orchard pruning are located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area.

FAULTS AND SEISMICITY
Faults
A fault is a fracture in the crust of the earth along which rocks on one side have moved relative to those on the other side. A fault trace is the line on the earth's surface defining the fault.

Displacement of the earth's crust along faults releases energy in the form of earthquakes and in some cases results in fault creep. Most faults are the result of repeated displacements over a long period of time.

The State of California designates faults as active, potentially active, and inactive depending on how recent the movement that can be substantiated for a fault. Table 3.6-1 presents the California fault activity rating system.

TABLE 3.6-1: FAULT ACTIVITY RATING

FAULT ACTIVITY RATING GEOLOGIC PERIOD OF LAST RUPTURE TIME INTERVAL (YEARS) Active (A) Holocene Within last 11,000 years
Potentially Active (PA) Quaternary 11,000-1.6 Million Years Inactive (I) Pre-Quaternary Greater than 1.6 Million
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
484
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-3 Figure 3.6-1 provides a map of known nearby faults in relation to the Project site. The closest known fault to the Project site is the Clovis Fault, which extends northwest-southeast from just north of the Project site. The Clovis Fault is not mapped as active and is mapped as showing no recognized displacement in the Quaternary Period (California Geological Survey, 2010). No other faults within 50 miles of the Project site are mapped on the 2010 Fault Activity Map of California.

Seismicity
The amount of energy available to a fault is determined by considering the slip-rate of the fault, its area (fault length multiplied by down-dip width), maximum magnitude, and the rigidity of the displaced rocks. These factors are combined to calculate the moment (energy) release on a fault.

The total seismic energy release for a fault source is sometimes partitioned between two different recurrence models, the characteristic and truncated Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) magnitude-frequency distributions. These models incorporate our knowledge of the range of magnitudes and relative frequency of different magnitudes for a particular fault.

Earthquakes are generally expressed in terms of intensity and magnitude. Intensity is based on the observed effects of ground shaking on people, buildings, and natural features. By comparison, magnitude is based on the amplitude of the earthquake waves recorded on instruments, which have a common calibration. The Richter scale, a logarithmic scale ranging from 0.1 to 9.0, with higher numbers being stronger, measures the magnitude of an earthquake relative to ground shaking.

Table 3.6-2 provides a description and a comparison of intensity and magnitude.

TABLE 3.6-2: MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE FOR EARTHQUAKES

RICHTER

MAGNITUDE

MODIFIED

MERCALLI

EFFECTS OF INTENSITY
Less than 2.0 I Microearthquakes, not felt or rarely felt; recorded by seismographs.

2.0-2.9 I to II Felt slightly by some people; damages to buildings.

3.0-3.9 II to IV Often felt by people; rarely causes damage; shaking of indoor objects noticeable.

4.0-4.9 IV to VI Noticeable shaking of indoor objects and rattling noises; felt by most people in the affected area; slightly felt outside; generally, no to minimal damage.

5.0-5.9 VI to VII Can cause damage of varying severity to poorly constructed buildings; at most, none to slight damage to all other buildings. Felt by everyone.

6.0-6.9 VII to X
Damage to a moderate number of well-built structures in populated areas; earthquakeresistant structures survive with slight to moderate damage; poorly designed structures receive moderate to severe damage; felt in wider areas; up to hundreds of miles/kilometers from the epicenter; strong to violent shaking in epicentral area.

7.0-7.9 VIII<
Causes damage to most buildings, some to partially or completely collapse or receive severe damage; well-designed structures are likely to receive damage; felt across great distances with major damage mostly limited to 250 km from epicenter.

8.0-8.9 VIII<
Major damage to buildings, structures likely to be destroyed; will cause moderate to heavy damage to sturdy or earthquake-resistant buildings; damaging in large areas; felt in extremely large regions.

9.0 and
Greater VIII< At or near total destruction - severe damage or collapse to all buildings; heavy damage and shaking extends to distant locations; permanent changes in ground topography.

SOURCE: AMEC FOSTER WHEELER, 2018, FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN.

Although most of Fresno County is situated within an area of relatively low seismic activity, the faults and fault systems that lie along the eastern and western boundaries of Fresno County, as well as 485
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North other regional faults, have the potential to produce high-magnitude earthquakes throughout the County (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2018). A high-magnitude earthquake on one of these faults could cause moderate intensity ground shaking in Fresno County. The most probable sources of earthquakes that might cause damage in Clovis are the Owens Valley Fault Group about 68 miles to the northeast, the Foothills Suture Fault Zone approximately 75 miles to the north, the San Andreas fault approximately 80 miles to the southwest, and the White Wolf fault located about 120 miles to the south (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2018). A maximum probable earthquake on any of the major faults would produce a maximum ground acceleration in the area of about 0.1g as ground deceleration generally decreases with increasing distance from the earthquake source. This level of ground shaking correlates to a Modified Mercalli intensity of I to V, light to moderate.

Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone
An active earthquake fault, per California’s Alquist-Priolo Act, is one that has ruptured within the Holocene Epoch (≈11,000 years). Based on this criterion, the California Geological Survey identifies Earthquake Fault Zones. These Earthquake Fault Zones are identified in Special Publication 42 (SP42), which is updated as new fault data become available. The SP42 lists all counties and cities within California that are affected by designated Earthquake Fault Zones. The Fault Zones are delineated on maps within SP42 (Earthquake Fault Zone Maps).

The California legislature passed the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act in 1972 to address seismic hazards associated with faults and to establish criteria for developments for areas with identified seismic hazard zones. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) evaluates faults with available geologic and seismologic data and determines if a fault should be zoned as active, potentially active, or inactive. If CGS determines a fault to be active, then it is typically incorporated into a Special Studies Zone in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Act. Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones are usually one-quarter mile or less in width and require site-specific evaluation of fault location and require a structure setback if the fault is found traversing a project site.

As shown in Figure 3.6-1, the Project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone. The nearest Alquist-Priolo fault zone, the Nunez Fault Zone, is located approximately 60 miles southwest of the Project site.

SEISMIC HAZARDS
Seismic Ground Shaking
The potential for seismic ground shaking in California is expected. As a result of the foreseeable seismicity in California, the State requires special design considerations for all structural improvements in accordance with the seismic design provisions in the California Building Code.

These seismic design provisions require enhanced structural integrity based on several risk parameters. Seismic ground shaking in the Project site is expected during the life of the proposed Project. All structures will be built in accordance with the California Building Code’s seismic design standards.
486
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-5 Fault Rupture
A fault rupture occurs when the surface of the earth breaks as a result of an earthquake, although this does not happen with all earthquakes. Surface ruptures have been known to extend up to 50 miles with displacements of an inch to 20 feet. Fault rupture almost always follows preexisting faults, which are zones of weakness. These ruptures generally occur in a weak area of an existing fault.

Ruptures can be sudden (i.e., earthquake) or slow (i.e., fault creep). Sudden displacements are more damaging to structures because they are accompanied by shaking. The Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act requires active earthquake fault zones to be mapped and it provides special development considerations within these zones. The Project site does not have surface expression of active faults and fault rupture is not anticipated. Figure 3.6-1 shows the regional faults in relation to Clovis.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a process whereby soil is temporarily transformed to a fluid form during intense and prolonged ground shaking (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2018). Under certain circumstances, the ground shaking can temporarily transform an otherwise solid material to a fluid state. Liquefaction is a serious hazard because buildings in areas that experience liquefaction may subside and suffer major structural damage. Liquefaction is most often triggered by seismic shaking, but it can also be caused by improper grading, landslides, or other factors. The potential for liquefaction is highest when groundwater levels are high, and loose, fine, sandy soils occur at depths of less than 50 feet.

According to the Fresno County MJHMP, no specific countywide assessments to identify liquefaction hazards have been performed; however, areas of the San Joaquin Valley in Fresno County are not considered conducive to liquefaction due to soil types, because they are either too coarse or too high in clay content (2018). To date, the Seismic Hazards Zonation Program of the CGS has not identified any seismically-induced liquefaction zones in the City of Clovis or in the Project site (California Department of Conservation, 2022a). The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed Tract 6205 (Spensley Property) Sunnyside and Shepherd Avenues Clovis, California (Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2019) (hereinafter “Geotechnical Report”) further indicates that the potential for liquefaction is low since groundwater occurs below 60 feet.

Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading typically results when ground shaking moves soil toward an area where the soil integrity is weak or unsupported, and it typically occurs on the surface of a slope, although it does not occur strictly on steep slopes. Oftentimes, lateral spreading is directly associated with areas of liquefaction. Since the potential for liquefaction is low, the potential for lateral spreading is low; additionally, because the City of Clovis is essentially flat, lateral spreading of soils has not been observed.

Landslides
The California Geological Survey classifies landslides with a two-part designation based on Varnes (1978) and Cruden and Varnes (1996). The designation captures both the type of material that failed and the type of movement that the failed material exhibited. Material types are broadly categorized 487
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North as either rock or soil, or a combination of the two for complex movements. Landslide movements are categorized as falls, topples, spreads, slides, or flows.

Landslide potential is influenced by physical factors, such as slope, soil, vegetation, and precipitation. Landslides require a slope, and can occur naturally from seismic activity, excessive saturation, and wildfires, or from human-made conditions such as construction disturbance, vegetation removal, wildfires, etc.

The Project site is essentially flat; therefore, the potential for a landslide in the Project site is low to non-existent.

SOILS
A Custom Soil Survey was completed for the Project site using the NRCS Web Soil Survey program.

The NRCS Soils Map is provided in Figure 3.2-2 in Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources. Table 3.6-3 identifies the type and range of soils found in the Project site.

TABLE 3.6-3: PROJECT SITE SOILS

SOIL TYPES DEVELOPMENT

AREA (ACRES)
% OF

DEVELOPMENT
AREA
NONDEVELOPMENT

AREA (ACRES)
% OF NONDEVELOPMENT
AREA
GRAND
TOTAL
(ACRES)
An - Alamo clay 0.00 0.00% 0.27 0.35% 0.27
ArA - Atwater sandy loam, 0 to
3 percent slopes 10.85 13.83% 16.21 21.14% 27.07
Gf - Grangeville fine sandy loam,
0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17 23.05 29.39% 8.49 11.07% 31.55 Gg - Grangeville fine sandy
loam, saline alkali 3.36 4.28% 0.09 0.12% 3.44
Re - Ramona loam, hard
substratum 20.39 26.00% 30.92 40.32% 51.31
Rh - Riverwash 0.81 1.03% 0.04 0.05% 0.86
SeA - San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes 11.54 14.71% 12.62 16.46% 24.15
TzbA - Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to
3 percent slopes 0.00 0.00% 1.86 2.43% 1.86
VaA - Visalia sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes 8.42 10.74% 6.19 8.07% 14.61
Grand Total 78.43 100.00% 76.69 100.00% 155.12
SOURCE: NRCS CUSTOM SOIL SURVEY 2022.

Linear extensibility is high. As shown in Table 3.6-3, this soil type is not found in the development area and 0.35 percent of the non-development area are Alamo clay soils. 488
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-7 Atwater sandy loam. The Atwater series consists of very deep, well drained soils formed in granitic alluvium. This series is characterized as well draining, with moderately rapid permeability and slow runoff. The soils are formed in dunes of uniformly sorted material containing a minimum of coarse and very coarse particles. They have mixed mineralogy. They are used mainly for production of truck crops, grapes, tree fruits, nuts, grain, and alfalfa. Vegetation consists of annual grasses, weeds, and low-growing shrubs. Erosion potential is moderate (K factor 0.24 to 0.28). Linear extensibility is low.

As shown in Table 3.6-3, 13.83 percent of the development area and 21.14 percent of the nondevelopment area are Atwater sandy loam.

Grangeville fine sandy loam. This series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in moderate coarse textured alluvium dominantly from granitic rock sources. Grangeville soils are on alluvial fans and floodplains and have slopes ranging from 0 to 2 percent. This series is characterized by negligible to very low runoff, moderately rapid permeability and moderate permeability in saline-sodic phases. Erosion potential is low to moderate (K factor 0.10 to 0.28).

Linear extensibility is low. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 33.67 percent of the development area and 11.19 percent of the non-development area are Grangeville fine sandy loam.

Ramona loam. The Ramona series is a member of the fine-loamy, mixed, thermic family of Typic Haploxeralfs. The series is well-drained, with slow to rapid runoff and moderately slow permeability.

They are used mostly for production of grain, grain-hay, pasture, irrigated citrus, olives, truck crops, and deciduous fruits. Uncultivated areas have a cover of annual grasses, forbs, chamise or chaparral.

Erosion potential is moderate to moderately-high (K factor 0.37 to 0.49). Linear extensibility is lowto-moderate. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 26 percent of the development area and 40.32 percent of the non-development area are Ramona loam.

Riverwash. Riverwash consists of very deep alluvial materials in stream channels that are frequently flooded (University of California, Davis, 2022). Little or no vegetation grows on Riverwash because of the flooding. No attempt is made to classify these materials because of the instability of the unit.

The unit is subject to erosion and deposition during flooding events. Erosion potential is low to moderate (K factor 0.05 to 0.37). Linear extensibility is low. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 1.03 percent of the development area and 0.05 percent of the non-development area are Riverwash.

San Joaquin loam. The San Joaquin series consists of moderately deep to a duripan, well and moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from mixed but dominantly granitic rock sources. They are on undulating low terraces with slopes of 0 to 9 percent. The series is characterized by well and moderately well drained, with medium to very high runoff and very slow permeability. They are used for cropland and livestock grazing; crops are small grains, irrigated pasture and rice; vineyards, fruit and nut crops. Erosion potential is moderate (K factor 0.28 to 0.32).

Linear extensibility is low-to-high. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 14.71 percent of the development area and 16.46 percent of the non-development area are San Joaquin loam.

Tujunga loamy sand. This series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in alluvium from granitic sources. Tujunga soils are on alluvial fans and floodplains, including urban areas. Slopes range from 0 to 12 percent. They are somewhat excessively drained, with negligible to low runoff and high saturated hydraulic conductivity. This soil is used for grazing, citrus, 489
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North grapes, other fruits, and urban residential or commercial development. Uncultivated areas have a cover of shrubs, annual grasses and forbs. In urban areas, ornamentals and turf-grass are common.

Erosion potential is low to moderate (K factor 0.17 to 0.24). Linear extensibility is low. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 0 percent of the development area and 2.43 percent of the non-development area are Tujunga loamy sand.

Visalia sandy loam. The Visalia series is coarse-loamy, mixed, alluvium derived from granite. This series is well drained with very low runoff. Erosion potential is low to moderate (K factor 0.15 to

0.24). Linear extensibility is low. As shown in Table 3.6-3, 10.74 percent of the development area and 8.07 percent of the non-development area are Visalia sandy loam.

NON-SEISMIC HAZARDS
Expansive Soils
The NRCS delineates soil units and compiles soils data as part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The following description of linear extensibility (also known as shrink-swell potential or expansive potential) is provided by the NRCS Physical Properties Descriptions:
“Linear extensibility” refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. It is an expression of the volume change between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or 10kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported in the table as percent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soil influence volume change.

The shrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3 percent; moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if 6 to 9 percent; and very high if more than 9 percent. If the linear extensibility is more than 3, shrinking and swelling can cause damage to buildings, roads, and other structures and to plant roots. Special design commonly is needed.

Expansive soils can undergo significant volume change with changes in moisture content. They shrink and harden when dried and expand and soften when wet. If structures are underlain by expansive soils, it is important that foundation systems be capable of tolerating or resisting any potentially damaging soil movements. In addition, it is important to limit moisture changes in the surficial soils by using positive drainage away from buildings as well as limiting landscape watering.

The Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates 2019) indicates that the Project site has a low swell potential. According to the NRCS Custom Soils Report, the soils in the Project site generally have a low shrink-swell potential, with the highest potential occurring in the northeastern corner of the Non-Development Area. Additionally, the Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates 2019) encountered upper soils consisting of silty sand, silty sand with trace clay, clayey sand, silty sand/sand and sand. The report notes that the clayey soils appeared to have a low swell potential.

Erosion
Erosion naturally occurs on the surface of the earth as surface materials (i.e., rock, soil, debris, etc.) is loosened, dissolved, or worn away, and transported from one place to another by gravity. Two 490
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-9 common types of soil erosion include wind erosion and water erosion. The steepness of a slope is an important factor that affects soil erosion. Erosion potential in soils is influenced primarily by loose soil texture and steep slopes. Loose soils can be eroded by water or wind forces, whereas soils with high clay content are generally susceptible only to water erosion. The potential for erosion generally increases as a result of human activity, primarily through the development of facilities and impervious surfaces and the removal of vegetative cover.

The NRCS Custom Soils Report identified the erosion potential for the soils in the Project site. This report summarizes those soil attributes used by the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2 (RUSLE2) for the map units in the selected area. Soil property data for each map unit component includes the hydrologic soil group, erosion factors Kf for the surface horizon, erosion factor T, and the representative percentage of sand, silt, and clay in the surface horizon.

Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. Within the Project site, the erosion factor Kf exhibits a wide range, varying from 0.10 to 0.49, which is considered a low to moderately-high potential for erosion; however, the majority of the Project site, particularly the development area, exhibits an erosion factor Kf of low to moderate. Furthermore, because the Project site is essentially flat, the erosion potential is slight.

Collapsible Soils
Collapsible soils undergo a rearrangement of their grains and a loss of cementation, resulting in substantial and rapid settlement under relatively low loads. Collapsible soils occur predominantly at the base of mountain ranges, where Holocene-age alluvial fan and wash sediments have been deposited during rapid run-off events. Soils prone to collapse are commonly associated with manmade fill, wind-laid sands and silts, and alluvial fan and mudflow sediments deposited during flash floods. During an earthquake, even slight settlement of fill materials can lead to a differentially settled structure and significant repair costs. Differential settlement of structures typically occurs when heavily irrigated landscape areas are near a building foundation. Examples of common problems associated with collapsible soils include tilting floors, cracking or separation in structures, sagging floors, and nonfunctional windows and doors. Collapsible soils have not been identified in the Clovis General Plan or the Fresno County MJHMP as an issue in the Clovis area.

Subsidence
Land subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of an area with little or no horizontal motion due to changes taking place underground. It is a natural process, although it can also occur (and is greatly accelerated) as a result of human activities. Common causes of land subsidence from human activity include: pumping water, oil, and gas from underground reservoirs; dissolution of limestone aquifers (sinkholes); collapse of underground mines; drainage of organic soils; and initial wetting of dry soils.

Subsidence has not been identified in the Clovis General Plan or Fresno County MJHMP as an issue in the Clovis area.
491
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Among the natural resources deserving conservation and preservation, and existing within the City, are the often-unseen records of past life buried in the sediments and rocks below the pavement, buildings, soils, and vegetation which now cover most of the area. These records – fossils and their geologic context – undoubtedly exist in large quantities below the surface in many areas in and near the City of Clovis, and span millions of years in age of origin. Fossils constitute a non-renewable resource; once lost or destroyed, the exact information they contained can never be reproduced.

Paleontologists consider all vertebrate fossils to be of significance. Fossils of other types are considered significant if they represent a new record, new species, an oldest occurring species, the most complete specimen of its kind, a rare species worldwide, or a species helpful in the dating of formations. However, even a previously designated low potential site may yield significant fossils.

Paleontological resources consist of the fossilized remains of plants and animals, including vertebrates (animals with backbones) and invertebrates (e.g., starfish, clams, ammonites, and coral).

Fossils of microscopic plants and animals, or microfossils, are also considered in this analysis. The age and abundance of fossils depend on the location, topographic setting, and particular geologic formation in which they are found.

Paleontological Setting - City of Clovis
The following summary of the geological evolution of Clovis and the potential for paleontological resources is based on the Clovis General Plan Draft EIR. Clovis is on recent alluvium, Pleistocene river and possibly lake sediments, and pre-Cretaceous meta-sedimentary rocks, and has either low or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.

Recent alluvium is a coarse-grained unconsolidated river wash, typically too young to contain any fossil resources. Thus, it is considered a formation of low paleontological sensitivity. Pre-Cretacious meta-sedimentary rocks have the potential to contain fossils, but they would have been destroyed by present day. Therefore, it is also considered a formation of low sensitivity.

Lastly, Pleistocene river and lake sediments could potentially contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. Three sedimentary formations are exposed in Clovis: Modesto Formation (Upper Unit); Riverbank Formation (Middle Unit); and Turlock Lake Formation (Upper Unit).

Modesto Formation (Upper Unit) is primarily composed of Sierran arkosic sand and gravel, preceding fine sand and silt near the lower San Joaquin River. Carbon dating determines the Modesto Formation to be 9,000 to 27,000 years old. Riverbank Formation (Middle Unit) is composed of yellowish-brown sandy loam. According to uranium dating, this unit is about 45,000 to 260,000 years old. A vertebrate fauna assigned to the Rancholabrean Land Mammal Age has been found in this unit. The Turlock Lake Formation (Upper Unit) contains stratified silt and fine sand, approximately 600,000 years old. Irvingtonian Land Mammal Age vertebrate fossils have been recovered in several locations in this unit. Thus, the 1993 General Plan EIR concludes that the Pleistocene river and lake sediments are considered an area of undetermined paleontological sensitivity and may contain undiscovered resources.
492
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-11 In addition to the fossils found in the units described above, large mammal bones were discovered in the Clovis river terraces dated to the Pleistocene epoch.

MINERAL RESOURCES
Mineral Resource Classification
Pursuant to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA), the California State Mining and Geology Board oversees the Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) classification system. The MRZ system characterizes both the location and known/presumed economic value of underlying mineral resources. The mineral resource classification system uses four main MRZs based on the degree of available geologic information, the likelihood of significant mineral resource occurrence, and the known or inferred quantity of significant mineral resources. The four classifications are described as follows:
• MRZ-1: Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated. • MRZ-4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ classification.

Mineral Resources
Mineral resources include commercially viable oil and gas deposits, and nonfuel mineral resources deposits. Nonfuel mineral resources include metals such as gold, silver, iron, and copper; industrial metals such as boron compounds, rare-earth elements, clays, limestone, gypsum, salt, and dimension stone; and construction aggregate, including sand, gravel, and crushed stone. The entire City of Clovis, including the Project site, is designated as MRZ-3 (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1988). MRZ-3 is a classification for areas containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance.

Location of Permitted Aggregate Mines
The California Office of Mine Reclamation periodically publishes a list of qualified permitted aggregate mines regulated under SMARA that is generally referred to as the AB 3098 List. The Public Contract Code precludes mining operations that are not on the AB 3098 List from selling sand, gravel, aggregates or other mined materials to State or local agencies. As of March 2022, there are 10 aggregate mines on the AB 3098 list in Fresno County; none of the 10 listed mines are within the Project site (California Department of Conservation, 2022b). 493
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North

3.6.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 USC, 7701 et seq.) requires the establishment and maintenance of an earthquake hazards reduction program by the Federal government.

Executive Order 12699
Signed in January 1990, this executive order of the President implements provisions of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act for “federal, federally assisted or federally regulated new building construction” and requires the development and implementation of seismic safety programs by Federal agencies.

International Building Code (IBC)
The purpose of the International Building Code (IBC) is to provide minimum standards to preserve the public peace, health, and safety by regulating the design, construction, quality of materials, certain equipment, location, grading, use, occupancy, and maintenance of all buildings and structures. IBC standards address foundation design, shear wall strength, and other structurally related conditions.

STATE
California Building Standards Code
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, known as the California Building Standards Code (CBSC) or simply "Title 24," contains the regulations that govern the construction of buildings in California. The CBSC includes 12 parts: California Building Standards Administrative Code, California Building Code, California Residential Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Energy Code, California Historical Building Code, California Fire Code, California Existing Building Code, California Green Building Standards Code (CAL Green Code), and the California Reference Standards Code. Through the CBSC, the State provides a minimum standard for building design and construction. The CBSC contains specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls, and site demolition. It also regulates grading activities, including drainage and erosion control.

California Health and Safety Code
Section 19100 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code establishes the State’s regulations for earthquake protection. This section of the code requires structural designs to be capable of resisting likely stresses produced by phenomena such as strong winds and earthquakes. 494
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-13 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 sets forth the policies and criteria of the State Mining and Geology Board, which governs the exercise of governments’ responsibilities to prohibit the location of developments and structures for human occupancy across the trace of active faults.

The policies and criteria are limited to potential hazards resulting from surface faulting or fault creep within Earthquake Fault Zones, as delineated on maps officially issued by the State Geologist.

Working definitions include:
• Fault – a fracture or zone of closely associated fractures along which rocks on one side have been displaced with respect to those on the other side; • Fault Zone – a zone of related faults, which commonly are braided and sub parallel, but may be branching and divergent. A fault zone has a significant width (with respect to the scale at which the fault is being considered, portrayed, or investigated), ranging from a few feet to several miles;
• Sufficiently Active Fault – a fault that has evidence of Holocene surface displacement along one or more of its segments or branches (last 11,000 years); and • Well-Defined Fault – a fault whose trace is clearly detectable by a trained geologist as a physical feature at or just below the ground surface. The geologist should be able to locate the fault in the field with sufficient precision and confidence to indicate that the required site-specific investigations would meet with some success. “Sufficiently Active” and “Well Defined” are the two criteria used by the State to determine if a fault should be zoned under the Alquist-Priolo Act.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, passed in 1990, addresses non-surface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including liquefaction and seismically-induced landslides. Under the Act, seismic hazard zones are to be mapped by the State Geologist to assist local governments in land use planning. The program and actions mandated by the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act closely resemble those of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (which addresses only surface fault-rupture hazards) and are outlined below:

The State Geologist is required to delineate the various “seismic hazard zones.” • Cities and counties, or other local permitting authority, must regulate certain development “projects” within the zones. They must withhold the development permits for a site within a zone until the geologic and soil conditions of the site are investigated and appropriate mitigation measures, if any, are incorporated into development plans. • The State Mining and Geology Board provides additional regulations, policies, and criteria to guide cities and counties in their implementation of the law. The Board also provides guidelines for preparation of the Seismic Hazard Zone Maps and for evaluating and mitigating seismic hazards.
• Sellers (and their agents) of real property within a mapped hazard zone must disclose that the property lies within such a zone at the time of sale. 495
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit
The California State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ known as the “Construction General Permit” was adopted on September 2, 2009 and was amended by Order No 2012-0006-DWQ which became effective on July 17, 2012. This NPDES permit establishes a riskbased approach to stormwater control requirements for construction projects by identifying three project risk levels. The main objectives of the General Permit are to:
• Reduce erosion
• Minimize or eliminate sediment in stormwater discharges • Prevent materials used at a construction site from contacting stormwater • Implement a sampling and analysis program
• Eliminate unauthorized non-stormwater discharges from construction sites • Implement appropriate measures to reduce potential impacts on waterways both during and after construction of projects
• Establish maintenance commitments on post-construction pollution control measures California mandates requirements for all construction activities disturbing more than one acre of land to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP documents the selection and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for a specific construction project, charging owners with stormwater quality management responsibilities. A construction site subject to the General Permit must prepare and implement a SWPPP that meets the requirements of the General Permit.

Division of Mines and Geology
The California Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) operates within the Department of Conservation. The DMG is responsible for assisting in the utilization of mineral deposits and the identification of geological hazards.

Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
The California Department of Conservation Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (Section 2710), also known as SMARA, provides a comprehensive surface mining and reclamation policy that permits the continued mining of minerals, as well as the protection and subsequent beneficial use of the mined and reclaimed land. The purpose of SMARA is to ensure that adverse environmental effects are prevented or minimized and that mined lands are reclaimed to a usable condition and are readily adaptable for alternative land uses. The production and conservation of minerals are encouraged, while also giving consideration to values relating to recreation, wildlife, range and forage, as well as aesthetic enjoyment. Residual hazards to public health and safety are eliminated.

These goals are achieved through land use planning by allowing a jurisdiction to balance the economic benefits of resource reclamation with the need to provide other land uses.

If a use is proposed that might threaten the potential recovery of minerals from an area that has been classified MRZ-2, SMARA would require the jurisdiction to prepare a statement specifying its 496
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-15 reasons for permitting the proposed use, provide public notice of these reasons, and forward a copy of the statement to the State Geologist and the State Mining and Geology Board (Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 2762). Lands classified MRZ-2 are areas that contain identified mineral resources.

State Geological Survey
Similar to the DMG, the California Geological Survey is responsible for assisting in the identification and proper utilization of mineral deposits, as well as the identification of fault locations and other geological hazards.

LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes several policies that are relevant to geological hazards and soils. General Plan goals and policies applicable to the Project are identified below:

Environmental Safety Element
• Goal 1: Minimized risk of injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by natural hazards.
• Policy 1.3. Geologic and seismic risk. Prohibit development on unstable terrain, excessively steep slopes, and other areas deemed hazardous due to geologic and seismic hazards unless acceptable mitigation measures are implemented. Require that underground utilities be designed to withstand seismic forces and accommodate ground settlement. • Policy 1.5. Critical and public facilities. Locate and design critical and public facilities to minimize their exposure and susceptibility to flooding, seismic and geological effects, fire, and explosions. Ensure critical use facilities (e.g., hospital, police, and fire facilities) can remain operational during an emergency.

City of Clovis Municipal Code
Chapter 8.1 of the Clovis Municipal Code adopts the 2019 CBSC, with amendments to address administrative provisions and additional requirements related to moved buildings, as the building code of the City.

Chapter 9.110 provides subdivision design and improvement requirements. Per Section 9.110.040, a grading plan is required to be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a subdivision-level building permit. Subdivisions are required to incorporate appropriate erosion and sediment control measures. Section 9.110.050 requires subdivisions in the City to install an approved sewer connection to the property line of each lot as part of the subdivision improvements.

Chapter 9.114 provides standards for the preparation and review of soils reports. A preliminary soils report based upon adequate test borings and prepared by a registered civil engineer is required for every subdivision for which a final map is required or when required as a condition of development when soils conditions warrant the investigation and report. A final soils report is required where a preliminary soils report was required, unless the final report is waived by the City Engineer. 497
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North Section 9.22.070 requires development to comply with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan.

Chapter 9.28 contains landscaping standards and requires a landscape design plan, irrigation design plan, and soil analysis in order to reduce runoff and control soil erosion as part of the landscape documentation package.

3.6.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on geology and soils and/or mineral resources if it will:
• Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
o Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo 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;
o Strong seismic ground shaking;
o Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or o Landslides.
• Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; • 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;
• 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; • 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; • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature;
• Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; and/or
• Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. 498
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-17 There are no significant deposits of mineral resources located on the Project site, as delineated by the Mineral Resources and Mineral Hazards Mapping Program. Additionally, the Project site is not designated as a Mineral Resource Zone and there are no existing mines located on the Project site.

Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact on mineral resources or mineral resource recovery sites and these impacts will not be discussed further.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.6-1: The proposed Project may expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides (Less than Significant)
Development of the proposed Project could result in the exposure of people and structures to conditions that have the potential for adverse effects associated with rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, and seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides. Each are discussed below:

GROUND RUPTURE
The California Geologic Survey (CGS) evaluates faults and determines if a fault should be zoned as active, potentially active, or inactive. All active faults are incorporated into a Special Studies Zone, also referred to as an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone. The Project site is not within an AlquistPriolo Special Study Zone.

The closest known fault to the Project site is the Clovis Fault, which extends northwest-southeast from just north of the Project site. The Clovis Fault is not mapped as active and is mapped as showing no recognized displacement in the Quaternary Period (California Geological Survey, 2010). No other faults within 50 miles of the Project site are mapped on the 2010 Fault Activity Map of California.

Therefore, because no faults are located on the Project sites, the potential for ground rupture (cracking or breaking of the ground during an earthquake) would be less than significant.

GROUND SHAKING
Although most of Fresno County is situated within an area of relatively low seismic activity, the faults and fault systems that lie along the eastern and western boundaries of Fresno County, as well as other regional faults, have the potential to produce high-magnitude earthquakes throughout the County. A high-magnitude earthquake on one of these faults could cause moderate intensity ground shaking in Fresno County. The most probable sources of earthquakes that might cause damage in Clovis are the Owens Valley Fault Group about 68 miles to the northeast, the Foothills Suture Fault Zone approximately 75 miles to the north, the San Andreas fault approximately 80 miles to the southwest, and the White Wolf fault located about 120 miles to the south. A maximum probable earthquake on any of the major faults would produce a maximum ground acceleration in the area of about 0.1g as ground deceleration generally decreases with increasing distance from the 499
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North earthquake source. This level of ground shaking correlates to a Modified Mercalli intensity of I to V, light to moderate.

To reduce the impact of seismic ground shaking on the development, the Project would be required to be constructed using standard engineering and seismic safety design techniques of the California Building Code, as required by Chapter 8.1 of the City’s Municipal Code. Seismic design provisions of current building codes generally prescribe minimum lateral forces, applied statically to the structure, combined with the gravity forces of dead-and-live loads. The code-prescribed lateral forces are generally considered to be substantially smaller than the comparable forces that would be associated with a major earthquake. Therefore, structures would be able to: (1) resist minor earthquakes without damage, (2) resist moderate earthquakes without structural damage but with some nonstructural damage, and (3) resist major earthquakes without collapse but with some structural as well as nonstructural damage. Design in accordance with these standards and policies would reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level.

LIQUEFICATION
Substantial hazards from liquefaction are not expected in areas of the San Joaquin Valley in Fresno County because they are either too coarse or too high in clay content. To date, the Seismic Hazards Zonation Program of the CGS has not identified any seismically-induced liquefaction zones in the City of Clovis or in the Project site. In addition, the Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates 2019) indicates that the potential for liquefaction on the Project site is low since groundwater occurs below 60 feet. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact.

LANDSLIDES
The Project site is essentially flat; therefore, the potential for a landslide in the Project site is low to non-existent. Some limited potential for slope instability risk could arise during grading and construction activities, where slopes could be over-steepened. However, this risk is mitigated by adhering to relevant California Building Code requirements. Additionally, according to the California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application, the site is not located within a Landslide and Liquefication Zone. As a result, the probability of landslides causing substantial adverse effects on people or structures is less than significant.

CONCLUSION
The Project site is subject to potential ground shaking caused by seismic activity. Seismic activity could come from a known active fault such as the Clovis fault, or any number of other faults in the region. In order to minimize potential damage to the buildings and site improvements, all construction in California is required to be designed in accordance with the latest seismic design standards of the California Building Code. As discussed under Section 3.6.2 Regulatory Setting, the California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 16 addresses structural design and Chapter 18 addresses soils and foundations. Collectively, these requirements, which have been adopted by the City of Clovis (Chapter 8.1), including design standards and requirements that are intended to minimize impacts to structures in seismically active areas of California. Section 1613 of the California Building Code specifically provides structural design standards for earthquake loads. 500
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-19 The Project site has a low risk of seismic-related ground failure as a result of liquefication. Landslide potential on the Project site is also low to non-existent. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.6-2: Implementation and construction of the proposed Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. (Less than Significant)
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, polluted stormwater runoff is a leading cause of impairment to the nearly 40 percent of surveyed U.S. water bodies which do not meet water quality standards. Over land or via storm sewer systems, polluted runoff is discharged, often untreated, directly into local water bodies. Soil erosion and the loss of topsoil is one of the most common sources of polluted stormwater runoff during construction activities. When left uncontrolled, stormwater runoff can erode soil and cause sedimentation in waterways, which collectively result in the destruction of fish, wildlife, and aquatic life habitats; a loss in aesthetic value; and threats to public health due to contaminated food, drinking water supplies, and recreational waterways.

Mandated by Congress under the Clean Water Act, the NPDES Stormwater Program is a comprehensive two-phased national program for addressing the non-agricultural sources of stormwater discharges which adversely affect the quality of our nation's waters. The program uses the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting mechanism to require the implementation of controls designed to prevent harmful pollutants, including soil erosion, from being washed by stormwater runoff into local water bodies. The construction activities for the proposed Project would be governed by the General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010- 0014-DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ), which states:
“…Particular attention must be paid to large, mass graded sites where the potential for soil exposure to the erosive effects of rainfall and wind is great and where there is potential for significant sediment discharge from the site to surface waters. Until permanent vegetation is established, soil cover is the most cost-effective and expeditious method to protect soil particles from detachment and transport by rainfall. Temporary soil stabilization can be the single most important factor in reducing erosion at construction sites. The discharger is required to consider measures such as: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizers, binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. These erosion control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed. Erosion control BMPs should be the primary means of preventing stormwater contamination, and sediment control techniques should be used to capture any soil that becomes eroded…”
General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010-0014-DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ) further states that:
501
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North “Sediment control BMPs should be the secondary means of preventing stormwater contamination. When erosion control techniques are ineffective, sediment control techniques should be used to capture any soil that becomes eroded. The discharger is required to consider perimeter control measures such as: installing silt fences or placing straw wattles below slopes. These sediment control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed…Inappropriate management of run-on and runoff can result in excessive physical impacts to receiving waters from sediment and increased flows. The discharger is required to manage all run-on and runoff from a project site. Examples include: installing berms and other temporary run-on and runoff diversions…All measures must be periodically inspected, maintained and repaired to ensure that receiving water quality is protected. Frequent inspections coupled with thorough documentation and timely repair is necessary to ensure that all measures are functioning as intended…” To ensure that construction activities are covered under General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010-0014-DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ), projects in California must prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) containing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and sediments to meet water quality standards. Such BMPs may include: temporary erosion control measures such as silt fences, staked straw bales/wattles, silt/sediment basins and traps, check dams, geofabric, sandbag dikes, and temporary revegetation or other ground cover. The BMPs and overall SWPPP is reviewed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board as part of the permitting process.

The SWPPP, once approved, is kept on site and implemented during construction activities and must be made available upon request to representatives of the RWQCB and/or the lead agency.

The Custom Soils Report identified the erosion potential for the majority of soils in the Project site as low to moderate. Furthermore, because the Project site is essentially flat, the erosion potential is considered slight. Regardless of the potential for erosion, there is always the potential for human caused erosion associated with construction activities or through the operational phase of a project.

Grading, excavation, removal of vegetation cover, and loading activities associated with construction activities temporarily expose soils and increase the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation during rail events. Construction activities can also result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that can adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at construction sites and staging areas.

In accordance with the NPDES Stormwater Program, the Project requires an approved SWPPP designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. The RWQCB has stated that these erosion control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed. The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB and are existing regulatory requirements. Further, the Project would be required to incorporate appropriate erosion and sediment control measures per Section 9.110.040 of the City’s Municipal Code, and adhere to the City’s landscape standards designed to reduce runoff and control soil erosion. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and applicable City grading regulations 502
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-21 would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.6-3: The proposed Project has the potential to be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of Project implementation, and potentially result in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse (Less than Significant)
Development of the proposed Project could result in the exposure of people and structures to conditions that have the potential for adverse effects associated with ground instability or failure.

Soils and geologic conditions in the Project site have the potential for landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Each are discussed below:

LIQUEFACTION
As discussed in Impact 3.6-1, the Seismic Hazards Zonation Program of the CGS has not identified any seismically-induced liquefaction zones in the City of Clovis, including the Project site. In addition, the Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates 2019) indicates that the potential for liquefaction on the Project site is low since groundwater occurs below 60 feet.

LATERAL SPREADING
Lateral spreading generally is a phenomenon where blocks of intact, non-liquefied soil move down slope on a liquefied substrate of large areal extent. The potential for liquefaction at the Project site is low; therefore, the potential for lateral spreading of soils is also low.

LANDSLIDES
As discussed in Impact 3.6-1, the Project site is essentially flat and, to date, the Seismic Hazards Zonation Program of the CGS has not identified any seismically-induced landslide zones in the City of Clovis or in the Project site. Therefore, the potential for a landslide in the Project site is low to non-existent.

COLLAPSIBLE SOILS
Collapsible soils occur predominantly at the base of mountain ranges, where Holocene-age alluvial fan and wash sediments have been deposited during rapid run-off events. Differential settlement of structures typically occurs when heavily irrigated landscape areas are near a building foundation.

Collapsible soils have not been identified in the Clovis General Plan or the Fresno County MJHMP as an issue in the Clovis area.

SUBSIDENCE
Land subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of an area with little or no horizontal motion due to changes taking place underground. It is a natural process, although it can also occur (and is greatly 503
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North accelerated) as a result of human activities. Subsidence has not been identified in the Clovis General Plan or Fresno County MJHMP as an issue in the Clovis area.

CONCLUSION
The Project site does not have a significant risk of becoming unstable as a result landslide, subsidence, soil collapse, liquefaction, liquefaction induced settlement, or lateral spreading.

Through compliance with applicable laws, standards, and guidelines, (including the CBSC and City’s Municipal Code), the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.6-4: The proposed Project has the potential to result in development 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. (Less than Significant)
Expansive soils are those that undergo volume changes as moisture content fluctuates; swelling substantially when wet or shrinking when dry. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the soils in the Project site have a low shrink-swell potential. Additionally, the Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates 2019) encountered upper soils consisting of silty sand, silty sand with trace clay, clayey sand, silty sand/sand and sand. The report notes that the clayey soils appeared to have a low swell potential.

The California Building Code Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 18, Section 1803.1.1.2 requires specific geotechnical evaluation when a preliminary geotechnical evaluation determines that expansive or other special soil conditions are present, which, if not corrected, would lead to structural defects.

The City of Clovis also requires a final soils report to be performed at a design-level to ensure that the foundations, structures, roadway sections, sidewalks, and other improvements can accommodate the specific soils, including expansive soils, at those locations. Compliance with this requirement would occur in accordance with the standards and requirements outlined in the California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 16, Chapter 17, and Chapter 18, which addresses structural design, tests and inspections, and soils and foundation standards. The final soils report would include design recommendations to ensure that soil conditions do not pose a threat to the health and safety of people or structures. Through compliance with applicable laws, standards, and guidelines, (including the CBSC and City’s Municipal Code), the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.6-5: The proposed Project does not have the potential to 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 (Less than Significant) The proposed Project involves the sphere of influence expansion (SOI) of approximately 155 acres into the City of Clovis’ SOI, including the annexation of the proposed 77-acre Development Area, to develop single-family detached units, open space, parks and recreational uses, and new public and private roadways and utility improvements (water, storm drainage, sanitary sewer). Septic tanks or 504
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL 3.6
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.6-23 septic systems are not proposed as part of the Development Area and will not be installed to serve the Development area. The Development Area would be served by a new wastewater distribution system installed within the roadway right-of-way and connecting to each new house that is constructed. The proposed wastewater conveyance facilities would connect to the existing sewer main(s) along nearby roadway(s) as part of the City of Clovis collection and treatment system.

The residences within the Non-development Area are currently on septic systems. There are no new residences proposed in this area, and no new septic systems would be installed. This area would be part of the SOI expansion, but would not be part of the annexation. At some future date, if those residents decided to annex into the City, they would be required to connect to the City of Clovis wastewater collection and treatment system and destroy the existing septic systems.

Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Impact 3.6-6: The proposed Project has the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Although the Project site is not expected to contain subsurface paleontological resources, the Project site is in an area known to have these resources and it is possible that undiscovered paleontological resources could be encountered during ground-disturbing activities. Damage to or destruction of a paleontological resource would be considered a potentially significant impact under local, state, or federal criteria. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.6-1 would ensure steps would be taken to reduce impacts to paleontological resources in the event that they are discovered during construction, including stopping work in the event potential resources are found, evaluation of the resource by a qualified paleontologist and appropriate handling of any potential resource.

This mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.6-1: Prior to approval of a grading permit, the Project proponent shall ensure that grading and improvement plans include the following note: “If any paleontological resources are found during grading and construction activities of the Project, all work shall be halted immediately within a 200-foot radius of the discovery until a qualified paleontologist has evaluated the find. Work shall not continue at the discovery site until the paleontologist evaluates the find and makes a determination regarding the significance of the resource and identifies recommendations for conservation of the resource, including preserving in place or relocating on the Project site, if feasible, or collecting the resource to the extent feasible and documenting the find with the University of California Museum of Paleontology.”
505
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North Impact 3.6-7: The proposed Project has the potential to result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site or known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state. (Less than Significant)
The entire City of Clovis, including the Project site, is designated as MRZ-3 (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1988). MRZ-3 is a classification for areas containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance. As of March 2022, there are 10 aggregate mines on the AB 3098 list in Fresno County; none of the 10 listed mines are within the Project site (California Department of Conservation, 2022b). There are no past or current commercial mining operations within the Project site. Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic. 506
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

F R E S N O C O U N T Y

K I N G S C O U N T Y

M A D E R A C O U N T Y

M A R I P O S A

C O U N T Y

M E R C E D C O U N T Y

T U L A R E C O U N T Y
UV140
UV180
UV59
UV65
UV233
UV33
UV198
UV145
UV41
UV198
UV41
UV168
UV99
UV152
UV63
UV49
UV198
UV198
UV99
UV201
UV137
UV41
UV216
UV UV41 269
UV198
UV49
UV69
UV180
UV33
UV145
UV43
UV180
£¤395
§¨¦5
§¨¦5
Nunez fault
Great Valley thrust fault system
Long Valley Caldera ring fault
Kerman
Fowler
Avenal
Dinuba
Woodlake
Tulare
Kingsburg
Merced
Mammoth
Lakes
Firebaugh
Mendota
Coalinga
Huron
San Joaquin Orange Cove
Reedley
Selma
Parlier
Sanger
Clovis
Fresno
Lindsay
Exeter
Visalia Farmersville
Porterville
Chowchilla
Madera
Lemoore
Corcoran
Hanford
±
0 2½ 5
Miles
LEGEND
County Boundary
Incorporated Area
Quaternary Fault
Figure 3.6-1. Earthquake Faults Map
Sources: Fresno County GIS. Map date: May 8, 2023.

SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
Project Location
507
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL

3.6-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
508
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-1 This section discusses regional greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, climate change, and energy conservation impacts that could result from Project implementation. The analysis contained in this section is intended to be at a Project-level, and covers impacts associated with the conversion of the Development Area to urban uses. This section provides a background discussion of greenhouse gases and climate change linkages and effects of global climate change. This section is organized with an existing setting, regulatory setting, approach/methodology, and impact analysis. The analysis and discussion of the GHG, climate change, and energy conservation impacts in this section focuses on the proposed Project’s consistency with local, regional, and statewide climate change planning efforts and discusses the context of these planning efforts as they relate to the proposed Project. Disclosure and discussion of the Project’s estimated energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions are provided.

There were two comments received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) comment period regarding greenhouse gases. One comment was provided from the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District (June 10, 2022), while another comment was provided by George Gonzalez (June 10, 2022).

All comments are included in Appendix A.

3.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

GREENHOUSE GASES AND CLIMATE CHANGE LINKAGES
Various gases in the Earth’s atmosphere, classified as atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in determining the Earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters Earth’s atmosphere from space, and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the Earth’s surface. The Earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high-frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared radiation.

Naturally occurring GHGs include water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3). Several classes of halogenated substances that contain fluorine, chlorine, or bromine are also GHGs, but they are, for the most part, solely a product of industrial activities. Although the direct GHGs CO2, CH4, and N2O occur naturally in the atmosphere, human activities have changed their atmospheric concentrations. From the pre-industrial era (i.e., ending about 1750) to 2011, concentrations of these three GHGs have increased globally by 40, 150, and 20 percent, respectively (IPCC, 2013).

GHGs, which are transparent to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. As a result, this radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone (O3), water vapor, nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

Emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change are attributable in large part to human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors. In California, the transportation sector is the largest emitter of GHGs, followed by the industrial and electricity generation sectors (California Energy Commission, 2020). 509
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY

3.7-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North As the name implies, global climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants, which are pollutants of regional and local concern, respectively. California produced 440 million gross metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2e) in 2016 (California Air Resources Board, 2018a).

Carbon dioxide equivalents are a measurement used to account for the fact that different GHGs have different potential to retain infrared radiation in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. This potential, known as the global warming potential of a GHG, is also dependent on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.

Consumption of fossil fuels in the transportation sector was the single largest source of California’s GHG emissions in 2017, accounting for 41% of total GHG emissions in the State. This category was followed by the industrial sector (24%), the electricity generation sector (including both in-state and out of-state sources) (15%), the agriculture sector (8%), the residential energy consumption sector (7%), and the commercial energy consumption sector (5%) (California Air Resources Board, 2020c).

EFFECTS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
The effects of increasing global temperature are far-reaching and extremely difficult to quantify.

The scientific community continues to study the effects of global climate change. In general, increases in the ambient global temperature as a result of increased GHGs are anticipated to result in rising sea levels, which could threaten coastal areas through accelerated coastal erosion, threats to levees and inland water systems and disruption to coastal wetlands and habitat.

If the temperature of the ocean warms, it is anticipated that the winter snow season would be shortened. Snowpack in the Sierra Nevada provides both water supply (runoff) and storage (within the snowpack before melting), which is a major source of supply for the State. The snowpack portion of the supply could potentially decline by 50% to 75% by the end of the 21st century (National Resources Defense Council, 2014). This phenomenon could lead to significant challenges securing an adequate water supply for a growing state population. Further, the increased ocean temperature could result in increased moisture flux into the State; however, since this would likely increasingly come in the form of rain rather than snow in the high elevations, increased precipitation could lead to increased potential and severity of flood events, placing more pressure on California’s levee/flood control system.

Sea level has risen approximately seven inches during the last century and it is predicted to rise an additional 22 to 35 inches by 2100, depending on the future GHG emissions levels (California Environmental Protection Agency, 2010). If this occurs, resultant effects could include increased coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion and disruption of wetlands. As the existing climate throughout California changes over time, mass migration of species, or failure of species to migrate in time to adapt to the perturbations in climate, could also result. Under the emissions scenarios of the Climate 510
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-3 Scenarios report (California Environmental Protection Agency, 2010), the impacts of global warming in California are anticipated to include, but are not limited to, the following.

Public Health
Higher temperatures are expected to increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation. For example, days with weather conducive to ozone formation are projected to increase from 25% to 35% under the lower warming range and to 75% to 85% under the medium warming range. In addition, if global background ozone levels increase as predicted in some scenarios, it may become impossible to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by increases in wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel long distances depending on wind conditions. The Climate Scenarios report indicates that large wildfires could become up to 55% more frequent if GHG emissions are not significantly reduced.

In addition, under the higher warming scenario, there could be up to 100 more days per year with temperatures above 90oF in Los Angeles and 95oF in Sacramento by 2100. This is a large increase over historical patterns and approximately twice the increase projected if temperatures remain within or below the lower warming range. Rising temperatures will increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat.

Water Resources
A vast network of man-made reservoirs and aqueducts capture and transport water throughout the State from northern California rivers and the Colorado River. The current distribution system relies on Sierra Nevada snow pack to supply water during the dry spring and summer months. Rising temperatures, potentially compounded by decreases in precipitation, could severely reduce spring snow pack, increasing the risk of summer water shortages.

The State’s water supplies are also at risk from rising sea levels. An influx of saltwater would degrade California’s estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers. Saltwater intrusion caused by rising sea levels is a major threat to the quality and reliability of water within the southern edge of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta, a major State fresh water supply. Global warming is also projected to seriously affect agricultural areas, with California farmers projected to lose as much as 25% of the water supply they need; decrease the potential for hydropower production within the State (although the effects on hydropower are uncertain); and seriously harm winter tourism. Under the lower warming range, the snow dependent winter recreational season at lower elevations could be reduced by as much as one month. If temperatures reach the higher warming range and precipitation declines, there might be many years with insufficient snow for skiing, snowboarding, and other snow dependent recreational activities.

If GHG emissions continue unabated, more precipitation will fall as rain instead of snow, and the snow that does fall will melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snow pack by as much as 70% to 90%. Under the lower warming scenario, snow pack losses are expected to be only half as large as those expected if temperatures were to rise to the higher warming range. How much snow pack will be lost depends in part on future precipitation patterns, the projections for which remain 511
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY

3.7-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North uncertain. However, even under the wetter climate projections, the loss of snow pack would pose challenges to water managers, hamper hydropower generation, and nearly eliminate all skiing and other snow-related recreational activities.

Agriculture
Increased GHG emissions are expected to cause widespread changes to the agriculture industry, reducing the quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. Although higher carbon dioxide levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency, California’s farmers will face greater water demand for crops and a less reliable water supply as temperatures rise.

Plant growth tends to be slow at low temperatures, increasing with rising temperatures up to a threshold. However, faster growth can result in less-than-optimal development for many crops, so rising temperatures are likely to worsen the quantity and quality of yield for a number of California’s agricultural products. Products likely to be most affected include wine grapes, fruits and nuts, and milk.

Crop growth and development will be affected, as will the intensity and frequency of pest and disease outbreaks. Rising temperatures will likely aggravate ozone pollution, which makes plants more susceptible to disease and pests and interferes with plant growth.

In addition, continued global warming will likely shift the ranges of existing invasive plants and weeds and alter competition patterns with native plants. Range expansion is expected in many species while range contractions are less likely in rapidly evolving species with significant populations already established. Should range contractions occur, it is likely that new or different weed species will fill the emerging gaps. Continued global warming is also likely to alter the abundance and types of many pests, lengthen pests’ breeding season, and increase pathogen growth rates.

Forests and Landscapes
Global warming is expected to alter the distribution and character of natural vegetation thereby resulting in a possible increased risk of large of wildfires. If temperatures rise into the medium warming range, the risk of large wildfires in California could increase by as much as 55%, which is almost twice the increase expected if temperatures stay in the lower warming range. However, since wildfire risk is determined by a combination of factors, including precipitation, winds, temperature, and landscape and vegetation conditions, future risks will not be uniform throughout the State. For example, if precipitation increases as temperatures rise, wildfires in southern California are expected to increase by approximately 30% toward the end of the century. In contrast, precipitation decreases could increase wildfires in northern California by up to 90%.

Moreover, continued global warming will alter natural ecosystems and biological diversity within the State. For example, alpine and sub-alpine ecosystems are expected to decline by as much as 60% to 80% by the end of the century as a result of increasing temperatures. The productivity of the State’s forests is also expected to decrease as a result of global warming. 512
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-5 Rising Sea Levels
Rising sea levels, more intense coastal storms, and warmer water temperatures will increasingly threaten the State’s coastal regions. Under the higher warming scenario, sea level is anticipated to rise 22 to 35 inches by 2100. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate coastal areas with saltwater, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats.

ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Energy in California is consumed from a wide variety of sources. Fossil fuels (including gasoline and diesel fuel, natural gas, and energy used to generate electricity) are most widely used form of energy in the State. However, renewable sources of energy (such as solar and wind) are growing in proportion to California’s overall energy mix. A large driver of renewable sources of energy in California is the State’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires the State to derive at least 33% of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and to achieve zero-carbon emissions by 2045 (as passed in September 2018, under AB 100).

Overall, in 2018, California’s per capita energy usage was ranked fourth-lowest in the nation (U.S.

EIA, 2020b). California’s per capita rate of energy usage has remained relatively constant since the 1970’s. Many State regulations since the 1970’s, including new building energy efficiency standards, vehicle fleet efficiency measures, as well as growing public awareness, have helped to keep per capita energy usage in the State in check.

The consumption of non-renewable energy (i.e. fossil fuels) associated with the operation of passenger, public transit, and commercial vehicles, results in GHG emissions that contribute to global climate change. Alternative fuels such as natural gas, ethanol, and electricity (unless derived from solar, wind, nuclear, or other energy sources that do not produce carbon emissions) also result in GHG emissions and contribute to global climate change.

Electricity Consumption
California relies on a regional power system composed of a diverse mix of natural gas, renewable, hydroelectric, and nuclear generation resources. In 2016, more than one-fourth of the electricity supply comes from facilities outside of the State. Much of the power delivered to California from states in the Pacific Northwest was generated by wind. States in the Southwest delivered power generated at coal-fired power plants, at natural gas-fired power plants, and from nuclear generating stations (U.S. EIA, 2020a). In 2016, approximately 50 percent of California’s utility-scale net electricity generation was fueled by natural gas. In addition, about 25 percent of the State’s utilityscale net electricity generation came from non-hydroelectric renewable technologies, such as solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass. Another 14 percent of the State’s utility-scale net electricity generation came from hydroelectric generation, and nuclear energy powered an additional 11 percent. The amount of electricity generated from coal negligible (approximately 0.2 percent) (U.S.

EIA, 2020a). The percentage of renewable resources as a proportion of California’s overall energy portfolio is increasing over time, as directed by the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). 513
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY

3.7-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total statewide electricity consumption increased from 166,979 gigawatt-hours (GWh) in 1980 to 228,038 GWh in 1990, which is an estimated annual growth rate of 3.66 percent. The statewide electricity consumption in 1997 was 246,225 GWh, reflecting an annual growth rate of 1.14 percent between 1990 and 1997 (U.S. EIA, 2020b). Statewide consumption was 274,985 GWh in 2010, an annual growth rate of 0.9 percent between 1997 and 2010. In 2021, electricity consumption in Fresno County was 8,378 GWh (California Energy Commission, 2023).

Oil
The primary energy source for the United States is oil, which is refined to produce fuels like gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. Oil is a finite, nonrenewable energy source. World consumption of petroleum products has grown steadily in the last several decades. As of 2016, world consumption of oil had reached 96 million barrels per day. The United States, with approximately five percent of the world’s population, accounts for approximately 19 percent of world oil consumption, or approximately 18.6 million barrels per day (U.S. EIA, 2020c). The transportation sector relies heavily on oil. In California, petroleum-based fuels currently provide approximately 96 percent of the State’s transportation energy needs.

Natural Gas/Propane
The State produces approximately 12 percent of its natural gas, while obtaining 22 percent from Canada and 65 percent from the Rockies and the Southwest (California Energy Commission, 2012).

In 2006, California produced 325.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas (California Energy Commission, 2012). PG&E is the largest publicly-owned utility in California and provides natural gas for residential, industrial, and agency consumers within the Fresno County area. In 2021, natural gas consumption in Fresno County was 318 million therms (California Energy Commission, 2023).

3.7.2 REGULATORY SETTING

FEDERAL
Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) was first signed into law in 1970. In 1977, and again in 1990, the law was substantially amended. The FCAA is the foundation for a national air pollution control effort, and it is composed of the following basic elements: NAAQS for criteria air pollutants, hazardous air pollutant standards, State attainment plans, motor National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) vehicle emissions standards, stationary source emissions standards and permits, acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection, and enforcement provisions.

The EPA is responsible for administering the FCAA. The FCAA requires the EPA to set NAAQS for several problem air pollutants based on human health and welfare criteria. Two types of NAAQS were established: primary standards, which protect public health, and secondary standards, which protect the public welfare from non-health-related adverse effects such as visibility reduction. 514
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-7 On April 2, 2007, in the court case of Massachusetts et al. vs. the USEPA et al. (549 U.S. 497), the U.S. Supreme Court found that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Federal Clean Air Act (42 USC Sections 7401-7671q). The Supreme Court held that the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency must determine whether or not emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. In making these decisions, the Administrator is required to follow the language of Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:
• Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed GHGs (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride) in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG pollution, which threatens public health and welfare.

Clovis City CouncilMarch 18, 2024

Clovis City Council
March 18, 2024