These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action was a prerequisite for implementing GHG emission standards for vehicles. In collaboration with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and CARB, the USEPA developed emission standards for light-duty vehicles (2012-2025 model years), and heavy-duty vehicles (2014-2027 model years).
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 sought to ensure that all vehicles sold in the U.S. would meet certain fuel economy goals. Through this Act, Congress established the first fuel economy standards for on-road motor vehicles in the United States. Pursuant to the Act, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, which is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and for revising existing standards.
Since 1990, the fuel economy standard for new passenger cars has been 27.5 mpg. Since 1996, the fuel economy standard for new light trucks (gross vehicle weight of 8,500 pounds or less) has been
20.7 mpg. Heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles and trucks over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight) are not currently subject to fuel economy standards. Compliance with federal fuel economy standards is determined on the basis of each manufacturer’s average fuel economy for the portion of its vehicles produced for sale in the U.S. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, which is administered by the EPA, was created to determine vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with the fuel economy standards. The EPA calculates a CAFE value for each manufacturer based on city and highway fuel economy test results and vehicle sales. Based on the information generated under the CAFE program, the USDOT is authorized to assess penalties for noncompliance. 515
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct)
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) was passed to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign petroleum and improve air quality. EPAct includes several parts intended to build an inventory of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in large, centrally fueled fleets in metropolitan areas. EPAct requires certain federal, State, and local government and private fleets to purchase a percentage of light duty AFVs capable of running on alternative fuels each year. In addition, financial incentives are included in EPAct. Federal tax deductions will be allowed for businesses and individuals to cover the incremental cost of AFVs. States are also required by the act to consider a variety of incentive programs to help promote AFVs.
Energy Policy Act of 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was signed into law on August 8, 2005. Generally, the act provides for renewed and expanded tax credits for electricity generated by qualified energy sources, such as landfill gas; provides bond financing, tax incentives, grants, and loan guarantees for a clean renewable energy and rural community electrification; and establishes a federal purchase requirement for renewable energy.
Federal Climate Change Policy
According to the EPA, “the United States government has established a comprehensive policy to address climate change” that includes slowing the growth of emissions; strengthening science, technology, and institutions; and enhancing international cooperation. To implement this policy, “the Federal government is using voluntary and incentive-based programs to reduce emissions and has established programs to promote climate technology and science.” The EPA administers multiple programs that encourage voluntary GHG reductions, including “ENERGY STAR,” “Climate Leaders,” and Methane Voluntary Programs. However, as of this writing, there are no adopted federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws directly regulating GHG emissions.
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
In 2009, EPA issued a final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emissions sources in the United States. In general, this national reporting requirement will provide EPA with accurate and timely GHG emissions data from facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 per year.
This publicly available data will allow the reporters to track their own emissions, compare them to similar facilities, and aid in identifying cost effective opportunities to reduce emissions in the future.
Reporting is at the facility level, except that certain suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial GHGs along with vehicle and engine manufacturers will report at the corporate level. An estimated 85% of the total U.S. GHG emissions, from approximately 10,000 facilities, are covered by this final rule.
STATE
The California Legislature has enacted a series of statutes in recent years addressing the need to reduce GHG emissions all across the State. These statutes can be categorized into four broad categories: (i) statutes setting numerical statewide targets for GHG reductions, and authorizing CARB to enact regulations to achieve such targets; (ii) statutes setting separate targets for increasing 516
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-9 the use of renewable energy for the generation of electricity throughout the State; (iii) statutes addressing the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels, which prompted the adoption of regulations by CARB; and (iv) statutes intended to facilitate land use planning consistent with statewide climate objectives. The discussion below will address each of these key sets of statutes, as well as CARB “Scoping Plans” intended to achieve GHG reductions under the first set of statutes and recent building code requirements intended to reduce energy consumption.
Statutes Setting Statewide GHG Reduction Targets
ASSEMBLY BILL 32 (GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT)
In 2006, the California State Legislature enacted the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Health & Safety Code Section 38500 et seq.), also known as Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (Stats. 2006, ch. 488). AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and a cap on statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. This reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that was phased in starting in 2012. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources.
SENATE BILL 32
SB 32 (Stats. 2016, ch. 249) added Section 38566 to the Health and Safety Code. It provides that “[i]n adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by [Division 25.5 of the Health and Safety Code], [CARB] shall ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” In other words, SB 32 requires California, by 2030, to reduce its statewide GHG emissions so that they are 40 percent below those that occurred in 1990.
Between AB 32 (2006) and SB 32 (2016), the Legislature has codified some of the ambitious GHG reduction targets included within certain high-profile Executive Orders issued by the last two Governors. The 2020 statewide GHG reduction target in AB 32 was consistent with the second of three statewide emissions reduction targets set forth in former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 2005 Executive Order known as S-3-05, which is expressly mentioned in AB 32. (See Health & Safety Code Section 38501, subd. (i).) That Executive Branch document included the following GHG emission reduction targets: by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. To meet the targets, the Governor directed several State agencies to cooperate in the development of a climate action plan. The Secretary of Cal-EPA leads the Climate Action Team, whose goal is to implement global warming emission reduction programs identified in the Climate Action Plan and to report on the progress made toward meeting the emission reduction targets established in the executive order.
In 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order, B-30-15, which created and established a “new interim statewide GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 517
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 1990 levels by 2030 in order to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.” SB 32 codified this target.
In 2018, the Governor issued Executive Order B-55-18, which established a statewide goal to “achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and maintain and achieve negative emissions thereafter.” The order directs the CARB to work with other State agencies to identify and recommend measures to achieve those goals.
Notably, the Legislature has not yet set a 2045 or 2050 target in the manner done for 2020 and 2030 through AB 32 and SB 32, though references to a 2050 target can be found in statutes outside the Health and Safety Code. Senate Bill 350 (SB 350) (Stats. 2015, ch. 547) added to the Public Utilities Code language that essentially puts into statute the 2050 GHG reduction target already identified in Executive Order S-3-05, albeit in the limited context of new state policies (i) increasing the overall share of electricity that must be produced through renewable energy sources and (ii) directing certain State agencies to begin planning for the widespread electrification of the California vehicle fleet. Section 740.12(a)(1)(D) of the Public Utilities Code now states that “[t]he Legislature finds and declares [that] … [r]educing emissions of [GHGs] to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 will require widespread transportation electrification.” Furthermore, Section 740.12(b) now states that the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), in consultation with CARB and the California Energy Commission (CEC), must “direct electrical corporations to file applications for programs and investments to accelerate widespread transportation electrification to reduce dependence on petroleum, meet air quality standards, … and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.”
ASSEMBLY BILL 1279
Assembly Bill 1279, passed in 2022, declares the State’s objective to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter. This is in addition to, and does not replace or supersede, Statewide greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.
Statute Setting Target for the Use of Renewable Energy for the Generation of Electricity
CALIFORNIA RENEWABLES PORTFOLIO STANDARD
In 2002, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1078 (Stats. 2002, ch. 516), which established the Renewables Portfolio Standard program, requiring retail sellers of electricity, including electrical corporations, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers, to purchase a specified minimum percentage of electricity generated by eligible renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. (See Pub.
Utilities Code, Section 399.11 et seq. [subsequently amended].) The legislation set a target by which 20 percent of the State’s electricity would be generated by renewable sources. (Pub. Utility Code, Section 399.11, subd. (a) [subsequently amended].) As described in the Legislative Counsel’s Digest, Senate Bill 1078 required “[e]ach electrical corporation … to increase its total procurement of 518
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-11 eligible renewable energy resources by at least one percent per year so that 20 percent of its retail sales are procured from eligible renewable energy resources. If an electrical corporation fails to procure sufficient eligible renewable energy resources in a given year to meet an annual target, the electrical corporation would be required to procure additional eligible renewable resources in subsequent years to compensate for the shortfall, if funds are made available as described. An electrical corporation with at least 20 percent of retail sales procured from eligible renewable energy resources in any year would not be required to increase its procurement in the following year.” In 2006, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill 107 (Stats. 2006, ch. 464), which modified the Renewables Portfolio Standard to require that at least 20 percent of electricity retail sales be served by renewable energy resources by year 2010. (Pub. Utility Code, Section 399.11, subd (a) [subsequently amended].)
Senate Bill X1-2 (Stats. 2011, 1st Ex. Sess., ch. 1) set even more aggressive statutory targets for renewable electricity, culminating in the requirement that 33 percent of the State’s electricity come from renewables by 2020. This legislation applies to all electricity retailers in the State, including publicly owned utilities, investor-owned utilities, electricity service providers, and community choice aggregators. All of these entities must meet renewable energy goals of 20 percent of retail sales from renewables by the end of 2013, 25 percent by the end of 2016, and 33 percent by the end of 2020. (See Pub. Utility Code, Section 399.11 et seq. [subsequently amended].) SB 350, discussed above, increases the Renewable Portfolio Standard to require 50 percent of electricity generated to be from renewables by 2030. (Pub. Utility Code, Section 399.11, subd (a); see also Section 399.30, subd. (c)(2).) Of equal significance, Senate Bill 350 also embodies a policy encouraging a substantial increase in the use of electric vehicles. As noted earlier, Section 740.12(b) of the Public Utilities Code now states that the PUC, in consultation with CARB and the CEC, must “direct electrical corporations to file applications for programs and investments to accelerate widespread transportation electrification to reduce dependence on petroleum, meet air quality standards, … and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.”
Executive Order, B-16-12, issued in 2012, embodied a similar vision of a future in which zeroemission vehicles (ZEV) will play a big part in helping the State meet its GHG reduction targets.
Executive Order B-16-12 directed State government to accelerate the market for in California through fleet replacement and electric vehicle infrastructure. The Executive Order set the following targets:
• By 2015, all major cities in California will have adequate infrastructure and be “ZEV ready”; • By 2020, the State will have established adequate infrastructure to support 1 million ZEVs in California;
• By 2025, there will be 1.5 million ZEVs on the road in California; and • By 2050, virtually all personal transportation in the State will be based on ZEVs, and GHG emissions from the transportation sector will be reduced by 80 percent below 1990 levels. 519
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North In 2018, Senate Bill 100 (Stats. 2018, ch. 312) revised the above-described deadlines and targets so that the State will have to achieve a 50% renewable resources target by December 31, 2026 (instead of by 2030) and achieve a 60% target by December 31, 2030. The legislation also establishes a State policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100% of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045.
In summary, California has set a statutory goal of requiring that, by the 2030, 60 percent of the electricity generated in California should be from renewable sources, with increased generation capacity intended to sufficiently allow the mass conversion of the statewide vehicle fleet from petroleum-fueled vehicles to electrical vehicles and/or other ZEVs. By 2045, all electricity must come from renewable resources and other carbon-free resources. Former Governor Brown had an even more ambitious goal for the State of achieving carbon neutrality as soon as possible and by no later than 2045. The Legislature is thus looking to California drivers to buy electric cars, powered by green energy, to help the State meet its aggressive statutory goal, created by SB 32, of reducing statewide GHG emissions by 2030 to 40 percent below 1990 levels. Another key prong to this strategy is to make petroleum-based fuels less carbon-intensive. A number of statutes in recent years have addressed that strategy. These are discussed immediately below.
Statutes and CARB Regulations Addressing the Carbon Intensity of Petroleum-based Transportation Fuels
ASSEMBLY BILL 1493, PAVLEY CLEAN CARS STANDARDS
In 2002, the Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1493 (“Pavley Bill”) (Stats. 2002, ch. 200), which directed the CARB to develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks beginning with model year 2009. (See Health and Safety Code Section 43018.5.) In September 2004, pursuant to this directive, CARB approved regulations to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. These regulations created what are commonly known as the “Pavley standards.” In September 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the Pavley standards to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles through the 2016 model year. These regulations created are what are commonly known as the “Pavley II standards.” (See California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 1900, 1961, and 1961.1 et seq.)
In 2012, CARB adopted an Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) program aimed at reducing both smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions for vehicles model years 2017-2025. This historic program, developed in coordination with the USEPA and NHTSA, combined the control of smog-causing (criteria) pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated set of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025. The regulations focus on substantially increasing the number of plug-in hybrid cars and zero-emission vehicles in the vehicle fleet and on making fuels such as electricity and hydrogen readily available for these vehicle technologies. The components of the ACC program are the LowEmission Vehicle (LEV) regulations that reduce criteria pollutants and GHG emissions from light- and medium-duty vehicles, and the Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulation, which requires manufacturers to produce an increasing number of pure ZEVs (meaning battery electric and fuel cell 520
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-13 electric vehicles), with provisions to also produce plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018 through 2025 model years. (See California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 1900, 1961, 1961.1, 1961.2, 1961.3, 1965, 1968.2, 1968.5, 1976, 1978, 2037, 2038, 2062, 2112, 2139, 2140, 2145, 2147, 2235, and 2317 et seq.)
It is expected that the Pavley standards will reduce GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles by about 34 percent below 2016 levels by 2025, all while improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.
Cap and Trade Program
In 2011, CARB adopted the final Cap‐and‐Trade Program for California (See California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Sections 95801-96022.) The California cap‐and‐trade program creates a market‐based system with an overall emissions limit for affected sectors. The program is intended to regulate more than 85 percent of California’s emissions and staggers compliance requirements according to the following schedule: (1) electricity generation and large industrial sources (2012); (2) fuel combustion and transportation (2015).
According to 2012 CARB guidance, “[t]he Cap-and-Trade Program will reduce GHG emissions from major sources (covered entities) by setting a firm cap on statewide GHG emissions while employing market mechanisms to cost-effectively achieve the emission-reduction goals. The statewide cap for GHG emissions from major sources, which is measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e), will commence in 2013 and decline over time, achieving GHG emission reductions throughout the program’s duration. Each covered entity will be required to surrender one permit to emit (the majority of which will be allowances, entities are also allowed to use a limited number of CARB offset credits) for each ton of GHG emissions they emit. Some covered entities will be allocated some allowances and will be able to buy additional allowances at auction, purchase allowances from others, or purchase offset credits.”
The guidance goes on to say that “[s]tarting in 2012, major GHG-emitting sources, such as electricity generation (including imports), and large stationary sources (e.g., refineries, cement production facilities, oil and gas production facilities, glass manufacturing facilities, and food processing plants) that emit more than 25,000 MTCO2e per year will have to comply with the Cap-and-Trade Program.
The program expands in 2015 to include fuel distributors (natural gas and propane fuel providers and transportation fuel providers) to address emissions from transportation fuels, and from combustion of other fossil fuels not directly covered at large sources in the program’s initial phase.” In early April 2017, the Third District Court of Appeal upheld the lawfulness of the Cap-and-Trade program as a “fee” rather than a “tax.” (See California Chamber of Commerce et al. v. State Air Resources Board et al. (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 604.)
AB 398 (Stats. 2017, ch. 135) extended the life of the existing Cap and Trade Program through December 2030.
521
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Statute Intended to Facilitate Land Use Planning Consistent with Statewide Climate Objectives
CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 375 (SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY) This 2008 legislation built on AB 32 by setting forth a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation on a regional level for the purpose of reducing GHGs. The focus is to reduce miles traveled by passenger vehicles and light trucks. CARB is required to set GHG reduction targets for each metropolitan region for 2020 and 2035. Each of California’s metropolitan planning organizations then prepares a sustainable communities strategy that demonstrates how the region will meet its GHG reduction target through integrated land use, housing, and transportation planning. Once adopted by the metropolitan planning organizations, the sustainable communities strategy is to be incorporated into that region’s federally enforceable regional transportation plan.
If a metropolitan planning organization is unable to meet the targets through the sustainable communities strategy, then an alternative planning strategy must be developed, which demonstrates how targets could be achieved, even if meeting the targets is deemed to be infeasible.
Climate Change Scoping Plans
AB 32 SCOPING PLAN
In 2008, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan, which contains the main strategies California will implement to achieve reduction of approximately 118 million metric tons (MMT) CO2e, or approximately 22 percent from the State’s projected 2020 emission level of 545 MMT of CO2e under a business-as-usual scenario. This is a reduction of 47 MMT CO2e, or almost 10 percent, from 2008 emissions. CARB’s original 2020 projection was 596 MMT CO2e, but this revised 2020 projection takes into account the economic downturn that occurred in 2008. The Scoping Plan also includes CARB recommended GHG reductions for each emissions sector of the State GHG inventory.
CARB estimates the largest reductions in GHG emissions would be by implementing the following measures and standards:
• improved emissions standards for light-duty vehicles (26.1 MMT CO2e); • the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (15.0 MMT CO2e);
• energy efficiency measures in buildings and appliances (11.9 MMT CO2e); and • renewable portfolio and electricity standards for electricity production (23.4 MMT CO2e).
In 2011, CARB adopted a Cap-and-Trade regulation. The Cap-and-Trade program covers major sources of GHG emissions in the State such as refineries, power plants, industrial facilities, and transportation fuels. The Cap-and-Trade program includes an enforceable emissions cap that will decline over time. The State distributes allowances, which are tradable permits, equal to the emissions allowed under the cap. Sources under the cap are required to surrender allowances and offsets equal to their emissions at the end of each compliance period. Enforceable compliance obligations started in 2013. The program applies to facilities that comprise 85 percent of the State’s GHG emissions.
522
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-15 With regard to land use planning, the Scoping Plan expects that reductions of approximately 3.0 MMT CO2e will be achieved through implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 375, which is discussed further below.
2014 SCOPING PLAN UPDATE
CARB revised and reapproved the Scoping Plan and prepared the First Update to the 2008 Scoping Plan in 2014 (2014 Scoping Plan). The 2014 Scoping Plan contains the main strategies California will implement to achieve a reduction of 80 MMT of CO2e emissions, or approximately 16 percent, from the State’s projected 2020 emission level of 507 MMT of CO2e under the business-as-usual scenario defined in the 2014 Scoping Plan. The 2014 Scoping Plan also includes a breakdown of the amount of GHG reductions CARB recommends for each emissions sector of the State’s GHG inventory.
Several strategies to reduce GHG emissions are included: the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the Pavley Rule, the ACC program, the Renewable Portfolio Standard, and the Sustainable Communities Strategy.
2017 SB 32 SCOPING PLAN
With the passage of SB 32, the Legislature also passed companion legislation AB 197, which provides additional direction for developing the scoping plan. In response, CARB adopted an updated Scoping Plan in December 2017. The document reflects the 2030 target of reducing statewide GHG emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels codified by SB 32. The GHG reduction strategies in the plan that CARB will implement to meet the target include:
• SB 350 - achieve 50 percent Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) by 2030 and doubling of energy efficiency savings by 2030;
• Low Carbon Fuel Standard - increased stringency (reducing carbon intensity 18 percent by 2030, up from 10 percent in 2020);
• Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels Scenario) - maintaining existing GHG standards for light- and heavy-duty vehicles, put 4.2 million zero-emission vehicles on the roads, and increase zero-emission buses, delivery and other trucks; • Sustainable Freight Action Plan - improve freight system efficiency, maximize use of nearzero emission vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy, and deploy over 100,000 zero-emission trucks and equipment by 2030;
• Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy - reduce emissions of methane and hydrofluorocarbons 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030 and reduce emissions of black carbon 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030;
• SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies - increased stringency of 2035 targets; • Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program - declining caps, continued linkage with Québec, and linkage to Ontario, Canada;
• 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions from the refinery sector; and • By 2018, develop an Integrated Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land base as a net carbon sink.
523
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 2022 SCOPING PLAN FOR ACHIEVING CARBON NEUTRALITY
For the first time, the 2022 Scoping Plan includes modeling and quantification of GHG emissions and carbon sequestration in natural and working lands (NWL). To date, the focus has been only on reducing the emissions of GHGs from our transportation, energy, and industrial sectors. The state’s 2020 and 2030 GHG reductions targets only include these sources, as they are the primary drivers of climate change and disproportionate harmful air pollution in our vulnerable communities. The 2022 Scoping Plan, through the lens of carbon neutrality, expands the scope to more meaningfully consider how our NWL contribute to our long-term climate goals.
Four scenarios were extensively modeled to develop this Scoping Plan, with the objective of informing the most viable path to remain on track to achieve our 2030 GHG reduction target: a reduction in anthropogenic emissions by 85% below 1990 levels and carbon neutrality by 2045. All four have their merits and are informed by stakeholder input. The scenario ultimately chosen as the basis of the 2022 Scoping Plan is the alternative that most closely aligns with existing statute and Executive Orders. It was selected because it best achieves the balance of cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and technological feasibility.
Building Code Requirements Intended to Reduce GHG Emissions
CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
The California Energy Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6), which is incorporated into the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, was first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Although these standards were not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, increased energy efficiency results in decreased GHG emissions because energy efficient buildings require less electricity and thus less consumption of fossil fuels, which emit GHGs. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The current 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, commonly referred to as the “Title 24” standards, include changes from the previous standards that were adopted, to do the following:
• Provide California with an adequate, reasonably priced, and environmentally sound supply of energy.
• Respond to Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which mandates that California must reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. • Pursue California energy policy that energy efficiency is the resource of first choice for meeting California's energy needs.
• Act on the California Energy Commission’s Integrated Energy Policy Report, which finds that standards are the most cost-effective means to achieve energy efficiency, states an expectation that the Building Energy Efficiency Standards will continue to be upgraded over time to reduce electricity and peak demand, and recognizes the role of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in reducing energy related to meeting California's water needs and in reducing GHG emissions.
524
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-17 • Meet the West Coast Governors' Global Warming Initiative commitment to include aggressive energy efficiency measures into updates of State building codes. • Meet Executive Order S-20-04, the Green Building Initiative, to improve the energy efficiency of non-residential buildings through aggressive standards.
The most recent Title 24 standards are the 2022 Title 24 standards. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards improve upon the 2019 Energy Standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings. Buildings permitted on or after January 1, 2023, must comply with the 2022 Standards. The California Energy Commission updates the standards every three years.
CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE
The purpose of the California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11) is to improve public health and safety and to promote the general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: 1) planning and design; 2) energy efficiency; 3) water efficiency and conservation; 4) material conservation and resource efficiency; and 5) environmental quality. The California Green Building Standards, which became effective on January 1, 2011, instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of commercial, low-rise residential uses, and State-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals.
The mandatory standards require the following:
• 20 percent mandatory reduction in indoor water use relative to baseline levels; • 50 percent construction/demolition waste must be diverted from landfills; • Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; and • Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particle boards.
The voluntary standards require the following:
• Tier I: 15 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 65 percent reduction in construction waste, 10 percent recycled content, 20 percent permeable paving, 20 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar reflective roof.
• Tier II: 30 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 75 percent reduction in construction waste, 15 percent recycled content, 30 percent permeable paving, 30 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar reflective roof.
525
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes several policies that are relevant to greenhouse gases.
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 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 rider526 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-19 friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists. • Policy 4.6: Transit priority corridors. Prioritize investments for, and transit services and facilities along the transit priority corridors.
• Policy 4.7: Bus rapid transit. Plan for bus rapid transit and transit-only lanes on transit priority corridors as future ridership levels increase. • Goal 5: A complete system of trails and pathways accessible to all residents. • 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.
• 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 527
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 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.
• 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.
3.7.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, climate change-related impacts are considered significant if implementation of the proposed Project would do any of the following:
1. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
2. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Based on these standards and significance thresholds and criteria, the Project’s effects have been categorized as either “no impact,” a “less than significant impact,” or a “potentially significant impact.” Mitigation measures are recommended for potentially significant impacts. If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant impact through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a “significant unavoidable impact.” 528
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-21
ANALYSIS APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two‐step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed Project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves. The cumulative global project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., human-made) GHG emissions sources across the globe. No project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate, but rather effects are shown to be caused by the cumulative emissions from across the globe. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a Statewide context and process for developing an enforceable Statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs. Small contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant.
The baseline against which to compare potential impacts of the Project includes the natural and anthropogenic drivers of global climate change, including worldwide GHG emissions from human activities that have increased by about 90 percent since 1970.1 As a result, the study area for climate change and the analysis of GHG emissions is broad. However, the study area is also limited by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(b), which directs lead agencies to consider an “indirect physical change” only if that change is a reasonably foreseeable impact, which may be caused by the Project.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 recommends that lead agencies quantify GHG emissions of projects and consider several other factors that may be used in the determination of significance of GHG emissions from a project, including the extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions; whether a project exceeds an applicable significance threshold; and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 does not establish a threshold of significance. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7 provides lead agencies the discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, and in establishing those thresholds, a lead agency may appropriately look to thresholds developed by other public agencies or suggested by other experts, as long as any threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence. The City of Clovis has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions and has not formally adopted a local plan for reducing GHG emissions. Similarly, the SJVACPD, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, CARB, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association 1 U.S. EPA, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhousegas-emissions-data, accessed July 14, 2022. 529
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North (CAPCOA), or any other State or applicable regional agency has yet to adopt a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the Project. Therefore, the significance of the Project’s potential impacts with regard to GHG emissions and climate change will be assessed solely on its consistency with plans and policies adopted for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change and the Project’s ability to incorporate sustainable features and strategies in its design to reduce GHG emissions. The analysis has also quantified the Project’s GHG emissions for informational purposes. The methodology for quantifying GHG emissions is the same as the methodology for quantifying criteria pollutants and is discussed in detail in Section 5.3, Air Quality, and in Appendix C, of this Draft EIR.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE (ENERGY CONSERVATION)
Consistent with Appendices F and G of the CEQA Guidelines, energy-related impacts are considered significant if implementation of the proposed Project would do the following:
• Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation; • Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
In order to determine whether or not the proposed Project would result in a significant impact on energy use, this EIR includes an analysis of proposed Project energy use, as provided under Impacts and Mitigation Measures below.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
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. (Less than Significant)
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. Therefore, the cumulative global emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change can be attributed to every nation, region, and city, and virtually every individual on Earth. A project’s GHG emissions are at a micro-scale relative to global emissions, but could result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution to a significant cumulative macro-scale impact. Implementation of the proposed Project would contribute to increases of GHG emissions that are associated with global climate change. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development would be primarily associated with increases of CO2 and other GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), from mobile sources and utility usage.
The proposed Project’s short-term construction-related and long-term operational GHG emissions were estimated using the California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod)TM. CalEEMod is a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use 530
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-23 planners, and environmental professionals to quantify GHG emissions from land use projects. The model quantifies direct GHG emissions from construction and operation (including vehicle use), as well as indirect GHG emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. Emissions are expressed in annual metric tons of CO2 equivalent units of measure (i.e., MT CO2e), based on the global warming potential of the individual pollutants.
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS
Estimated maximum mitigated GHG emissions associated with construction of the proposed Project are summarized in Table 3.7-1. These emissions include all worker vehicle, vendor vehicle, hauler vehicle, and off-road construction vehicle GHG emissions. For the purposes of this analysis, based on input from the Project Proponents, the proposed Project is assumed to commence construction in 2023 and finish in 2028. It should be noted that this schedule is an approximation and may change over time. A regularized construction schedule was utilized for modelling purposes for the sake of simplicity.
TABLE 3.7-1: MAXIMUM CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS (MITIGATED AVERAGE MT CO2E/YEAR) YEAR BIO- CO2 NON-BIO- CO2 TOTAL CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E
2028 0 762.7 762.7 0.1 <0.1 776.8
SOURCE: CALEEMOD (SEE APPENDIX C FOR DETAIL)
As presented in the table above, short-term construction emissions of GHGs are estimated at a maximum of approximately 776.8 MT CO2e per year.
OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
The operational GHG emissions estimate for the proposed Project includes on-site area, energy, mobile, waste, and water emissions generated by the Project during its operation. Estimated GHG emissions associated with the proposed Project are summarized in Table 3.7-2, below. It should be noted that CalEEMod does not account for the Governor Newsom’s Zero-Emission by 2035 Executive Order (N-79-20), which requires that all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zeroemission vehicles by 2035. Additionally, the CalEEMod modeling conducted does not account for the incorporation of additional Renewables Portfolio Standard attainment beyond CalEEMod defaults, incorporation of AB 341, and incorporation of Title 24 requirements for the EV charging stations. This is anticipated to substantially reduce the operational emissions associated with passenger vehicles (i.e. mobile emissions), energy emissions, and waste emissions, over time, including prior the 2035 final implementation year. Therefore, the operational emissions results are likely an overestimate for mobile, energy, and waste emissions. As shown in the following table, as conservatively modeled, the annual GHG emissions associated with the proposed Project would be approximately 5,071 MT CO2e.
531
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North TABLE 3.7-2: OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS AT BUILDOUT (METRIC TONS/YEAR) BIO- CO2 NON-BIO- CO2 TOTAL CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E
Area 0 7.3 7.3 <0.1 0 7.5
Energy 0 1,222.4 1,222.4 0.1 <0.1 1,231.4
Mobile 0 3,371.2 3,371.2 0.2 0.2 3,435.4
Waste 126.5 0 126.5 7.5 0 313.4
Water 12.5 29.4 42.0 1.3 <0.1 83.4
Total 139.0 4,630.4 4,769.4 9.1 0.3 5,071.1
SOURCE: CALEEMOD (SEE APPENDIX C FOR DETAIL)
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), the electrical service provider for the Project site, will need to continue to annually increase renewable electricity through 2045 in order to meet the carbon-free electricity target set by SB 100. The Project would need to comply with AB 341, which set a target of reducing landfill waste by 75 percent by 2020, and the Title 24 standards, which require incorporation of rooftop PV systems and solar panels, as well as electric vehicle charging capabilities. The potential reductions in GHG emission associated with this requirement were not incorporated in the reductions, as the amount would be confirmed at a later stage; therefore, the operational emissions shown in Table 3.7-2 are conservative.
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE PLANS
Several plans and policies have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions in the San Joaquin Valley region. The Project’s consistency with the State’s 2022 Scoping Plan, as well as the Fresno Council of Governments’ (Fresno COG’s) 2022 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and the City of Clovis General Plan are discussed below.
The CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan
The 2022 Scoping Plan strategies that are applicable to the Project include reducing fossil fuel use, energy demand, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT); maximizing recycling and diversion from landfills; and increasing water conservation. The Project would be consistent with these goals through Project design, which includes complying with the latest requirements of the CALGreen Code and Building Energy Efficiency Standards, providing EV parking spaces and charging equipment, and complying with the AB 341 waste diversion goal of 75 percent. In addition, the Project would receive electricity from PG&E, which is required to reduce GHG emissions by increasing procurement from eligible renewable energy by set target years. Moreover, the Project would reduce VMT and energy demand, thereby reducing GHG emissions, by constructing residences in a time of housing shortage in California, which would provide housing opportunities to those who already live near the Project Site or in the San Joaquin Valley, providing new housing opportunities near multiple public transit options; providing extensive pedestrian connectivity to encourage alternative modes of transportation; and incorporating a number of sustainable design features, including, but not limited, to installation of energy-efficient light fixtures, high-efficiency plumbing fixtures, EV parking spaces, and rooftop PV systems and solar panels, consistent with the requirements of the latest (2022) version of the Title 24 Energy Code, or better. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan.
532
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-25 Fresno COG 2022 RTP/SCS
The Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS includes five goals with corresponding policies and actions for improved mobility, communities accessible by sustainable transportation options, a multi-faceted multimodal transportation network, a transportation network that supports a sustainable and vibrant economy, and a region that embraces clean transportation, technology, and innovation.
These strategies include similar measures to the 2022 Scoping Plan, such as supporting lower-carbon and sustainable transportation options. The Project’s consistency with the applicable 2022 RTP/SCS strategies is discussed in Table 3.7-3, below. As shown therein, the Project would be consistent with the GHG emissions reduction strategies contained in the Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS.
TABLE 3.7-3: PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE FRESNO COG’S 2022 RTP/SCS
GOAL PROJECT CONSISTENCY
Goal 1: Improved
mobility and
accessibility for all
No Conflict. The Project would support the use of zero-emission and low-emission vehicles, by implementing EV-ready charging spaces, consistent with the requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, although this Project is not a transportation improvement project, the Project is located near existing transit routes.
The Project would also include extensive park and trail connections, both within the Project site as well as to neighboring areas. Specifically, 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. These park and trail connections would provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to neighboring communities.
Goal 2: Vibrant
communities that are
accessible by
sustainable
transportation
options
No Conflict. As stated above, the Project would support the use of zero-emission and lowemission vehicles, by implementing EV-ready charging spaces, consistent with the requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, although this Project is not a transportation improvement project, the Project is located near existing transit routes. In addition, as previously stated, The Project would also include extensive park and trail connections, both within the Project site as well as to neighboring areas, promoting sustainable forms of transportation such as walking and cycling, as well as enhancing the vibrancy of the Project and neighboring communities.
Goal 3: A safe, wellmaintained, efficient,
and climate-resilient
multimodal
transportation
network
No Conflict. As stated above, the Project would support the use of zero-emission and lowemission vehicles, by implementing EV-ready charging spaces, consistent with the requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, although this Project is not a transportation improvement project, the Project is located near existing transit routes. In addition, as previously stated, the Project would also include extensive park and trail connections, both within the Project site as well as to neighboring areas, promoting sustainable forms of transportation such as walking and cycling.
Furthermore, the Project would be developed using the latest State and local requirements relating to safety and security. Development of the Project site would include 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, which would enhance the safety and security of the site and it surroundings, by connecting to existing development, thus ensuring a safe, well-maintained, efficient, and climate-resilient multimodal transportation network.
Goal 4: A
transportation
No Conflict. The State of California is currently in a housing crisis. The proposed Project will provide a variety of housing types and lot sizes that will accommodate a range of housing 533
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North network that
supports a
sustainable and
vibrant economy
objectives and buyer needs with a goal to ensure housing for a variety of families and lifestyles. The Project would bring new housing to the City of Clovis and the broader region, by establishing 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), and by providing infrastructure that meets City standards and is integrated with existing and planned facilities and connections. Such infrastructure includes the improvements to the transportation network described herein.
For example, as stated above, the Project would support the use of zero-emission and lowemission vehicles, by implementing EV-ready charging spaces, consistent with the requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, although this Project is not a transportation improvement project, the Project is located near existing transit routes. In addition, as previously stated, the Project would also include extensive park and trail connections, both within the Project site as well as to neighboring areas, promoting sustainable forms of transportation such as walking and cycling, supporting the sustainability and vibrancy of the local economy.
Goal 5: A region
embracing clean
transportation,
technology, and
innovation
No Conflict. As stated above, the Project would support the use of zero-emission and lowemission vehicles, by implementing EV-ready charging spaces, consistent with the requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, although this Project is not a transportation improvement project, the Project is located near existing transit routes. In addition, as previously stated, the Project would also include extensive park and trail connections, both within the Project site as well as to neighboring areas, promoting sustainable forms of transportation such as walking and cycling. Therefore, the Project would promote clean transportation, technology, and innovation.
SOURCE: FRESNO COG 2022 RTP/SCS
CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN
The City’s General Plan includes the overarching goal of a comprehensive and well-maintained multimodal circulation system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. For example, Goal 1 of the Circulation Element is to develop a context-sensitive and “complete streets” transportation network that prioritizes effective connectivity and accommodates a comprehensive range of mobility needs. The Project would create a multimodal circulation system, including via road, bicycle, and pedestrian pathways, that would provide for a safe and efficient connection to the surrounding transportation network, consistent with a “complete streets” approach to development. In addition, 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. These park and trail connections would improve the quality of life for nearby residents.
Separately, the Air Quality Element of the City’s General Plan calls for improved air quality through effective land use and transportation planning, regional cooperation, and a reduction in emissions.
For example, Goal 1 of the Air Quality Element directs the City to develop a local environment that is protected for air pollution and emissions; Policy 1.1 (Land Use and transportation) calls for the City to reduce GHG emissions through mixed use and transit-oriented development and welldesigned transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems. Furthermore, Policy 3.5 (Energy and water 534
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-27 conservation) of the Open Space and Conservation Element encourages new development and substantial rehabilitation projects to exceed energy and water conservation and reduction standards set in the California Building Code. In line with this overarching goal and these policies, the Project would be required to comply with the applicable requirements of the CALGreen Code and California Energy Code, the City’s Green Building Standards Code, and the City’s Energy Code. The Project would be constructed in compliance with the 2022 Title 24 (CALGreen and Energy Code) standards and would be located within walking and biking distance to nearby transit options. In addition, the Project would include a variety of park and open space, which would connect 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, which would contribute to vehicle trip reductions. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with the applicable goals, objectives, and policies in the City’s General Plan.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the Project, including the off-site improvements, would be consistent with the plans, policies, regulations, and GHG emissions reduction actions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan Update, the Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS, and the Clovis General Plan. Furthermore, because the Project is consistent and does not conflict with these plans, policies, and regulations, the Project’s incremental increase in GHG emissions as described above would not result in a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, Project-related impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant relative to this topic.
Impact 3.7-2: Project implementation would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources. (Less than Significant) The CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of the potentially significant energy implications of a Project. CEQA requires mitigation measures to reduce “wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary” energy usage (Public Resources Code Section 21100, subdivision [b][3]). According to the CEQA Guidelines, the means to achieve the goal of conserving energy include decreasing overall energy consumption, decreasing reliance on natural gas and oil, and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. In particular, the proposed Project would be considered “wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary” if it were to violate State and federal energy standards and/or result in significant adverse impacts related to Project energy requirements, energy inefficiencies, energy intensiveness of materials, cause significant impacts on local and regional energy supplies or generate requirements for additional capacity, fail to comply with existing energy standards, otherwise result in significant adverse impacts on energy resources, or conflict or create an inconsistency with applicable plan, policy, or regulation.
The amount of energy used by the proposed Project during operation would directly correlate primarily with the amount of energy used by Project buildings and outdoor lighting, and the generation of vehicle trips associated with the proposed Project. Other Project energy uses include fuel used by vehicle trips generated during Project construction and operation, fuel used by off-road construction vehicles during construction activities, and fuel used by Project maintenance activities during Project operation. The following discussion provides a detailed calculation of energy usage expected for the proposed Project, as provided by applicable modelling software (i.e. CalEEMod and 535
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North the CARB EMFAC2021). Additional assumptions and calculations are provided within Appendix C of this EIR.
ELECTRICITY
Electricity used by the proposed Project would be used primarily to generate energy for the residential homes, landscape lighting, and street lighting. As shown in the following tables, “Energy” is one of the categories that was modeled for GHG emissions. The total unmitigated and mitigated GHG emissions generated from the “Energy” category during Project operation is 1,231 CO2e.
ON-ROAD VEHICLES (OPERATION)
The proposed Project would generate vehicle trips during its operational phase. A description of Project operational on-road mobile energy usage is provided below.
According to the Transportation Impact Assessment prepared for the proposed Project (LSA, 2023), and as described in more detail in Section 3.13: Transportation and Circulation of this EIR, the Project would increase automobile VMT by approximately 5,705 new daily trips. In order to calculate operational on-road vehicle energy usage and emissions, De Novo Planning Group used fleet mix data from the CalEEMod output for the proposed Project, Year 2028 gasoline and diesel MPG (miles per gallon) factors for individual vehicle classes as provided by EMFAC2021, weighted average MPG factors for gasoline and diesel were derived. Therefore, upon full buildout, the proposed Project would generate operational vehicle trips that would use a total of approximately 2,100 gallons of gasoline and 341 gallons of diesel per day, or 341,321 gallons of gasoline and 69,484 gallons of diesel per year.
ON-ROAD VEHICLES (CONSTRUCTION)
The proposed Project would also generate on-road vehicle trips during Project construction (from construction workers and vendors travelling to and from the Project site). De Novo Planning Group estimated the vehicle fuel consumed during these trips based the assumed construction schedule, vehicle trip lengths and number of workers per construction phase as provided by CalEEMod, and Year 2023 gasoline and diesel MPG factors provided by EMFAC2021 (year 2023 factors were used to represent a conservative analysis, as the energy efficiency of construction activities is anticipated to improve over time). For the sake of simplicity, it was assumed that all construction worker light duty passenger cars and truck trips use gasoline as a fuel source, and all medium and heavy-duty vendor trucks use diesel fuel. Table 3.7-4, below, describes gasoline and diesel fuel consumed during each construction phase (in aggregate). As shown, the vast majority of on-road mobile vehicle fuel used during the construction of the proposed Project would occur during the building construction phase.
There is no feasible mitigation available that would reduce on-road mobile vehicle GHG emissions generated by the Project construction activities (requiring the use of electric construction vehicles was deemed infeasible, given price and availability concerns). See Appendix C of this EIR for a detailed accounting of construction on-road vehicle fuel usage estimates. 536
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY 3.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.7-29 TABLE 3.7-4: ON-ROAD MOBILE FUEL GENERATED BY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES – BY PHASE
CONSTRUCTION
PHASE
# OF DAYS
TOTAL DAILY
WORKER
TRIPS(A)
TOTAL DAILY
VENDOR
TRIPS(A)
TOTAL HAULER
WORKER
TRIPS(A)
TOTAL
GALLONS OF
GASOLINE
FUEL(B)
TOTAL
GALLONS OF
DIESEL
FUEL(B)
Site Preparation 60 18 0 0 443 0
Grading 155 20 0 0 1,272 0
Building
Construction 960 297 96 0 5,852 6,185
Paving 110 15 0 0 677 0
Architectural
Coatings 110 59 0 0 133 0
Total N/A N/A N/A N/A 8,940 6,648
NOTE:
(A) PROVIDED BY CALEEMOD OUTPUT.(B)
SEE APPENDIX C OF THIS EIR FOR FURTHER DETAIL
SOURCE: CALEEMOD; EMFAC2021.
OFF-ROAD VEHICLES (CONSTRUCTION)
Off-road construction vehicles would use diesel fuel during the construction phase of the proposed Project. A non-exhaustive list of off-road constructive vehicles expected to be used during the construction phase of the proposed Project includes: forklifts, generator sets, tractors, excavators, and dozers. Based on the total amount of CO2 emissions expected to be generated by the proposed Project (as provided by the CalEEMod output), and standard conversion factors (as provided by the U.S. Energy Information Administration), the proposed Project would use a total of approximately 18,955 gallons of diesel fuel for off-road construction vehicles. Detailed calculations are provided in Appendix C of this EIR.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Project would use energy resources for the operation of Project buildings (electricity), outdoor lighting (electricity), for on-road vehicle trips (e.g. gasoline and diesel fuel) rerouted by the proposed Project, and from off-road and on-road construction activities associated with the proposed Project (e.g. diesel fuel). Each of these activities would require the use of energy resources.
The proposed Project would be responsible for conserving energy, to the extent feasible, and relies heavily on reducing per capita energy consumption to achieve this goal, including through statewide and local measures.
The proposed Project would be in compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations regulating energy usage. For example, PG&E, the electric and natural gas provider to the proposed Project, is responsible for the mix of energy resources used to provide electricity for its customers, and it is in the process of implementing the statewide RPS to increase the proportion of renewable energy (e.g. solar and wind) within its energy portfolio. PG&E has achieved at least a 33% mix of renewable energy resources in 2020 and is on track to achieve 60% mix of renewable energy by 2030. Other statewide measures, including those intended to improve the energy efficiency of the statewide passenger and heavy-duty truck vehicle fleet (e.g. the Pavley Bill and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard), would improve vehicle fuel economies, thereby conserving gasoline and diesel fuel.
These energy savings would continue to accrue over time. 537
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.7 GREENHOUSE GASES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY
3.7-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North The proposed Project would comply with all existing energy standards and would not be expected to result in significant adverse impacts on energy resources. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not cause an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources nor cause a significant impact on any of the thresholds as described by the CEQA Guidelines. This is a less than significant impact.
538
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-1 The purpose of this section is to disclose and analyze the potential impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials related to the Project site and general vicinity, and to analyze the potential for exposure of people to hazards and hazardous materials as the Project is built and operated in the future. Information in this section is derived primarily from:
• Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Tract No. 6205 Property, Northeast corner of N.
Sunnyside and E. Shepherd Avenues, Clovis, California 93619 (Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2019) (see Appendix G);
• 2014 Clovis General Plan (City of Clovis, 2014);
• 2014 Clovis General Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (City of Clovis, 2014); • 2000 Fresno County General Plan (City of Clovis, 2000); • 2018 Fresno County Zoning Ordinance (City of Clovis, 2018); • City of Clovis Municipal Code, Title 9 – Development Code (City of Clovis, 2022).
There were two comments received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) comment period regarding hazards and hazardous materials from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) (May 18, 2022) and the County of Fresno Department of Public Works and Planning (June 2, 2022). All comments are included in Appendix A.
3.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
PHYSICAL SETTING
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 in Chapter
2.0, Project Description, 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).
Existing Site Uses
The Project site is approximately 155 acres and includes 39 Assessor parcels (APNs). 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 539
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 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 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.
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.
Site Topography
The Project site is relatively flat and is approximately 385 feet above mean sea level.
HAZARDS ASSESSMENT
For the purposes of this EIR, “hazardous material” is defined as provided in California Health & Safety Code, Section 25501:
• Any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. “Hazardous materials” include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment, if released into the workplace or the environment.
“Hazardous waste” is a subset of hazardous materials. For the purposes of this EIR, the definition of hazardous waste is essentially the same as that in the California Health & Safety Code, Section 25517, and in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Section 66261.2:
540
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-3 • Hazardous wastes are wastes that, because of their quantity, concentration, physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may either cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.
CCR Title 22 categorizes hazardous waste into hazard classes according to specific characteristics of ignitibility, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity. Hazardous waste with any of these characteristics is also known as a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste.
Hazardous materials can be categorized as hazardous non-radioactive chemical materials, radioactive materials, toxic materials, and biohazardous materials. The previous definitions are adequate for non-radioactive hazardous chemicals. Radioactive and biohazardous materials are further defined as follows:
• Radioactive materials contain atoms with unstable nuclei that spontaneously emit ionizing radiation to increase their stability.
• Radioactive wastes are radioactive materials that are discarded (including wastes in storage) or abandoned.
• Toxic wastes are harmful or fatal when ingested or absorbed (e.g., containing mercury, lead). When toxic wastes are land disposed, contaminated liquid may leach from the waste and pollute groundwater.
• Biohazardous materials include materials containing certain infectious agents (microorganisms, bacteria, molds, parasites, and viruses) that cause or significantly contribute to increased human mortality or organisms capable of being communicated by invading and multiplying in body tissues.
• Medical wastes include both biohazardous wastes (byproducts of biohazardous materials) and sharps (devices capable of cutting or piercing, such as hypodermic needles, razor blades, and broken glass) resulting from the diagnosis, treatment, or immunization of human beings, or research pertaining to these activities.
There are a number of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes that could be found on any given property based on past uses. Some common examples include agrichemicals (chlorinated herbicides, organophosphate pesticides, and organochlorine pesticides, such as Mecoprop [MCPP], Dinoseb, chlordane, dichloro-diphenyltrichloroethane [DDT], and dichloro-diphenyldichloroethylene [DDE]), petroleum based products (oil, gasoline, diesel fuel), a variety of chemicals including paints, cleaners, and solvents, and asbestos-containing or lead-containing materials (e.g., paint, sealants, pipe solder).
Site Reconnaissance
As part of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) that was completed for the Project site (Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2019), a site reconnaissance, which included a visual observation of the Development Area and surrounding properties, was conducted by Ms. Michelle Phillips, Krazan’s Environmental Assessor, on January 10, 2019. The objective of the site reconnaissance is to obtain 541
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions, including hazardous substances and petroleum products, in connection with the property (including soils, surface waters, and groundwater). A discussion of visual observations is provided below. Refer to the Site Observations Map (Figure 3.8-1) for the locations of items discussed below. • A rural residential dwelling1 with the associated Development Area address of 5230 East Shepherd Avenue was observed within the southern portion of the Development Area. A domestic water well was observed adjacent to the west of the rural residential dwelling (See Photographs No. 11 – 17 in Appendix F).
• Adjacent to the north of the rural residential dwelling was a large warehouse2 where pecans are dried, packed and shipped. The warehouse was observed to be a steel structure set upon a slab on grade foundation. Large cracks were observed in the concrete foundation. De minimis staining was also observed on the foundation. Inside the warehouse were observed multiple pallets of stacked and bagged product, a forklift, several empty pallets, at least three refrigerators, and a ladder. A small storage room and two restrooms were also observed in the warehouse. The storage room was observed to contain a generator, at least three boxes of Roundup® herbicide, and multiple bags of zinc sulfate fertilizer. A small shop area was observed in the northeastern portion of the warehouse and contained multiple various tools and two compressed gas cylinders. The type of gas contained was no longer legible on the cylinders (See Photographs No. 18 – 21, 29 in Appendix G). • The warehouse had a bay attached to the eastern side and observed within the bay were a large electric heater for drying pecans, a concrete-lined subsurface pit that is used to dry the pecans, and at least eight metal access panels for the pit. No evidence of petroleum products was observed within or near the pit. De minimis staining was observed on the motor of the electric heater (See Photographs No. 26 – 28 in Appendix G). • Adjacent to the north of the warehouse and lined against its back wall were observed three approximately 250-gallon aboveground storage (AST) tanks. Two ASTs contained diesel fuel and the third contained gasoline. The site reconnaissance was completed a day following a heavy rain event and it was not clear if the ground surface below the ASTs exhibited any petroleum product staining because the ground remained saturated with rainwater precluding visual observations (See Photographs No. 22 – 25 in Appendix G). A propane tank and stack of firewood were observed adjacent to the north of the ASTs (See Photograph No. 31 in Appendix G).
• Four 55-gallon drums containing motor oil were observed to be located to the west of the ASTs. The drums exhibited de minimis staining. Also observed adjacent to the drums were two trash bins, a shopping cart and a tire (See Photograph No. 30 in Appendix G). • At least seven utility vaults were observed to be located on the southern boundary along E.
Shepherd Avenue (See Photograph No. 11, 52 in Appendix G). • Four pole-mounted transformers were observed on the Development Area. Two of the polemounted transformers were observed to be located in the central-eastern portion of the 1 Note – this dwelling was removed in 2020.
2 Note – this warehouse was removed in 2020.
542
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-5 Development Area, and two were observed to be located along the eastern boundary on the southern portion of the Development Area. The transformer casings displayed no visual evidence of leakage and the ground surface below the transformers displayed no evidence of discoloration. Based on Krazan’s observations, the Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) Company is the owner of the transformers. The transformers were not labeled as to their polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) status. Based on the visual absence of apparent unauthorized releases of insulating fluids from the transformers at the time of Krazan’s site reconnaissance, the transformers are not currently anticipated to pose an adverse impact to the Development Area (See Photographs No. 9, 38, 40, 58 in Appendix G). • A small residential structure3 was observed to be located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area. Access was not granted to the structure at the time of the site reconnaissance because a trailer was parked up against the building, blocking the only entrance to the structure. Additionally, the three windows observed were all too frosted to allow observation of the interior. Multiple items were stored around the structure (See Photographs No. 34 – 37 in Appendix G):
o On the western side was stored an old satellite dish, a pile of concrete debris, a flatbed trailer, and farming equipment;
o On the southern side was stored a pile of railroad ties, old chain-link fencing, a ladder and farming equipment; and,
o On the eastern side was stored two trailers, multiple bales of chain link fencing, several stacks of tires and a portable water tank on a trailer. • Five agricultural water wells were observed to be located on the Development Area, two located along the east-west centerline of the Development Area to the east of the small residential structure previously mentioned, one located in the southwestern corner of the Development Area, one located in the northwestern corner of the Development Area, and one located along the eastern boundary of the Development Area (See Photographs No. 6, 33 – 34, 37 – 39, 41, and 53 in Appendix G).
• A rural residential dwelling4 was observed within the northwestern portion of the Development Area. A domestic water well and associated water tank was observed adjacent to the west of the rural residential dwelling (See Photographs No. 6 – 7, 42 – 49 in Appendix G).
• Two large berms containing wood branches and debris from pruning the orchard were observed along the eastern boundary of the Development Area. The berms were at least 10 to 12 feet tall. The larger of the two berms was approximately 550 feet in length, and the smaller was approximately 80 feet in length. The smaller of the two berms appears to be mainly chopped wood. It is unknown how long the berms have been there and what the condition of the ground is below the berms. Additionally, three flatbed trailers were observed to be located adjacent to the smaller berm (See Photographs No. 50 – 51, 54 – 57 in Appendix G).
3 Note – this residential structure was removed in 2020. 4 Note – this residential structure was removed in 2020. 543
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • During the visual observations of the Development Area, no hazardous materials were observed. Exposed surface soils did not exhibit obvious signs of discoloration in accessible areas. No obvious evidence (vent pipes, fill pipes, dispensers, etc.) of USTs was noted within the areas observed. No standing water or major depressions were observed on the Development Area. No indications of former structures, such as foundations, were observed on the Development Area.
• No high-voltage, tower-mounted electrical transmission lines were observed on or in the vicinity of the Development Area.
Site Usage Survey
A review of a previous environmental assessment, historical aerial photographs, a USGS topographic quadrangle map, City of Clovis Planning and Development Department (CCPDD) and Fresno County Public Works and Development Department (FCPWDD) records, reasonably ascertainable City directories, a search for historical fire insurance maps (HFIMs), and a Phase I ESA interview were utilized to assess the history of the Development Area.
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION
Historical aerial photographs dated 1937, 1946, 1950, 1957, 1962, 1967, 1973, 1979, 1984, 1987, 1998, 2005, 2009, 2012, and 2016 were reviewed to assess the history of the Development Area.
These photographs were obtained from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). As shown in the historical aerial photographs, the Development Area has been used for agricultural and residential uses since at least 1979. A discussion of the aerial photograph interpretation is provided below. • 1979: The Development Area appears to be utilized for agricultural purposes. A small residential structure has been developed in the southwestern corner of the northeastern portion of the Development Area. One out-structure on the Development Area has been removed and replaced with a barn approximately twice as large as the previous structure.
At least 15 rural residential dwellings have been developed on the eastern adjacent property to the Development Area. At least eight rural residential dwellings have been developed in the vicinity to the south, seven rural residential dwellings have been developed in the vicinity to the north and seven rural residential dwellings have been developed in the vicinity to the northeast of the Development Area.
• 1984: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 1979 aerial photograph, except that five rural residential dwellings have been developed and at least 10 plots have been cleared for residential development on the adjacent properties to the north and west of the Development Area.
Additionally, a new paved road has been developed to access the newly developed residences.
• 1987: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 1984 aerial photograph, except that a rural residential dwelling has been developed in the northwestern corner of the northeastern portion of the Development Area. The adjacent property to the west and vicinity properties to the west 544
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-7 and northwest appear to be fallow land. Several additional structures have been developed on the rural residential properties adjacent to the east of the Development Area. • 1998: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 1987 aerial photograph, except that 10 rural residential dwellings have been developed on the adjacent properties to the north and west of the Development Area. One rural residential dwelling has been developed on a vicinity property to the north of the Development Area. The adjacent property to the west and vicinity properties to the west and northwest appear to have been recently cultivated. • 2005: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 1998 aerial photograph, except that the adjacent property to the west and vicinity properties to the west and northwest appear to be utilized for agricultural purposes. Residential tract housing has been developed in the vicinity to the southwest of the Development Area.
• 2009: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 2005 aerial photograph, except that additional residential tract housing has been developed on the southeastern adjacent property and in the vicinity to the southwest of the Development Area. A large commercial structure has been developed in the vicinity to the southeast of the Development Area. • 2012: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 2009 aerial photograph.
• 2016: Conditions on the Development Area and the adjacent properties appear relatively similar to those noted in the 2012 aerial photograph, except that Dry Creek Trailhead has been developed on a southwestern vicinity property, on the southwest corner of N.
Sunnyside and E. Shepherd Avenues. A PG&E Substation has been developed in the vicinity to the west of the Development Area.
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE MAP
Krazan’s review of the USGS, 7.5 minute, Clovis California topographic quadrangle map dated 1964, photo revised 1981, indicates that two residential structures and a water well are depicted on the Development Area.
CCPDD AND FCPWDD
On January 9, 2019, the CCPDD and FCPWDD were visited to review building permit records for the Development Area APNs of 557-021-19, -20 and -21, and the historical address of 5230 E. Shepherd Avenue. No building permit records are on file with the CCPDD or FCPWDD for the current APNs or historical Development Area addresses. Therefore, no permits for items such as underground storage tanks, demolition, or previous structures/features were revealed for the Development Area.
CITY DIRECTORIES
Krazan contracted with EDR to provide a review of available City directories for the Development Area historic address of 5230 East Shepherd Avenue utilizing approximately five-year intervals.
According to the City directory, the owner of the site from 1996 to 2002 was CAL PECAN. 545
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS
Krazan reviews Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps (SFIMs) to evaluate prior land use of the Development Area and the adjacent properties. SFIMs typically exist for cities with populations of 2,000 or more, the coverage dependent on the location of the Development Area within the City limits. Krazan contracted with EDR to provide copies of available SFIMs for the Development Area and the adjacent properties as far back as 1867. EDR’s search of SFIMs revealed no coverage for the Development Area and the adjacent properties.
INTERVIEWS
Krazan attempted to conduct an interview with the current and past owners of the Development Area. The interviews are designed to provide pertinent information regarding potential environmental impacts associated with the Development Area.
Development Area Owner: A completed owner questionnaire was not received from nor was an interview conducted with the property owner. The absence of a completed owner interview/questionnaire represents a data gap.
Previous Development Area Owners/Occupants: An interview with a previous owner/occupant of the Development Area was not reasonably ascertainable. Consequently, the absence of information regarding the history and historical uses of the Development Area obtained from an interview of the previous owner and/or occupant constitutes a data gap.
Regulatory Agency Records
A review of regulatory agency records was conducted to help determine if hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated on the Development Area and/or the adjacent properties and businesses. Regulatory records are reviewed based on the following criteria:
1) properties with known soils and/or groundwater releases considered to represent the potential for impact to the Development Area that are located within 1,760 feet of the Development Area for constituents of concern impacts or 528 feet of the Development Area for petroleum hydrocarbon impacts;
2) properties that are adjacent or in proximity to the Development Area included within the EDR regulatory database report or noted during the site reconnaissance to possibly handle, store, or generate hazardous materials.
FRESNO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM The Fresno County Department of Community Health, Environmental Health System (FCEHS) is the lead regulatory agency, or Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), for hazardous materials handling facilities in Fresno County. The review of the FCEHS CUPA and Solid Waste Programs Resource List (CUPA List) dated January 7, 2019, indicated that no records are on file with the FCEHS for the Development Area. However, records are on file with the FCEHS for adjacent and vicinity properties which do not represent material evidence of the potential to represent environmental concern to the Development Area.
546
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-9
CITY OF CLOVIS FIRE DEPARTMENT
The City of Clovis Fire Department (CCFD) has jurisdiction for the fire protection for the Development Area and the immediate vicinity. According to representatives of the CCFD, records of hazardous materials incidents are kept by the FCEHS. Additionally, hazardous/flammable incidents are filed according to the date of occurrence and by the location of occurrence with the FCEHS.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD – GEOTRACKER The review of the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Geotracker database available via the RWQCB Internet Website indicated that no sites including leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, cleanup program sites, land disposal sites, or military sites are listed for the Development Area, the adjacent properties, or properties located within the Development Area vicinity. Additionally, no permitted underground storage tank (UST) sites were determined to be located on or adjacent to the Development Area.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL – ENVIROSTOR The review of the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Envirostor database available via the DTSC’s Internet Website indicated that no sites including State response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school cleanup sites, or military or school evaluation sites are listed for the Development Area, the adjacent properties, or properties located within 1,000 feet of the Development Area. Additionally, no Federal Superfund – National Priorities List (NPL) sites were determined to be located within a one-mile radius of the Development Area.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, DIVISION OF OIL, GAS & GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES - DOMS
The review of the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) Online Mapping System indicated that no plugged and abandoned or producing oil wells are located on or adjacent to the Development Area.
LOCAL AREA TRIBAL RECORDS
No Indian reservations, USTs on Indian land, or LUSTs on Indian land were reported on the Development Area, adjacent properties, or vicinity properties in the EDR-provided government database report.
REGULATORY AGENCY LISTS REVIEW
Several agencies have published documents that list businesses or properties, which have handled hazardous materials or waste or may have experienced site contamination. The lists consulted in the course of our assessment were compiled by EDR and represent reasonably ascertainable current listings. The locations and distances of every property listed by EDR were not verified as part of the Phase I ESA. As part of the Phase I ESA, the location and distances of the properties Krazan deemed as having the potential to adversely impact the Development Area were verified. The actual location 547
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North of the listed properties may differ from the EDR listing. The actual distances of the listed properties are based on observations during the site reconnaissance completed as part of the Phase I ESA. No EDR-listed unmapped (non-geocoded) sites were determined to be located on or adjacent to the Development Area. Please refer to Appendix D of Appendix G in the Table of Contents for a copy of the EDR Radius Map Report.
There were no listings for the Development Area or adjacent properties.
The following property was listed in the vicinity of the Development Area:
• P-R Farms, Inc. (located approximately 158 to 173 feet to the southwest 4648-4650 East Shepherd Avenue): According to EDR, this facility is listed a CUPA Listings, Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System (SWEEPS) UST, California Facility Inventory Database (FID) UST, and HIST UST site including a 500-gallon gasoline tank and a 2,000- gallon diesel tank on a farm property installed in at least 1985. No records for releases or removal were found on file with the FCEHS, RWQCB or DTSC. Based on the review of available regulatory records and its hydraulically cross-gradient location from the Development Area, there is no evidence to suggest that this facility represents an environmental concern in connection with the Development Area.
The remaining properties within the specified search radius of the Development Area, which appeared on local, state, or federally published lists of sites that use or have had releases of hazardous materials or petroleum products are of sufficient distance and/or situated hydraulically cross- or downgradient from the Development Area, such that impact to the Development Area via groundwater migration is unlikely. In general, potentially hazardous materials released from facilities located approximately hydraulically upgradient within the Development Area vicinity, or in a hydraulically cross-gradient direction in proximity to the site, may have a reasonable potential of migrating to the Development Area via groundwater flow. This opinion is based on the assumption that non-vaporous hazardous materials generally do not migrate large distances laterally within the soil, but rather tend to migrate with groundwater in the general direction of groundwater flow.
However, the potential for migration of volatile hazardous materials may include movement within soils, groundwater flow or potentially omni-directionally if present in a vaporous state.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MIGRATION IN VAPOR
Hazardous materials or petroleum product vapors which may have the potential to migrate into the subsurface of the Development Area may be caused by the release of vapors from contaminated soil or groundwater either on or in the vicinity of the Development Area from current or historical uses of the Development Area and/or adjacent or vicinity properties. Current or past land uses such as gasoline stations (using petroleum hydrocarbons), dry cleaning establishments (using chlorinated volatile organic compounds), former manufactured gas plant sites (using volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds), and former industrial sites, such as those that had vapor degreasing or other parts-cleaning operations (using chlorinated volatile organic compounds) are of particular concern.
Constituent of concern vapors are capable of migrating great distances omni-directionally along 548
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-11 subsurface conduits such as pipelines, utility lines, sewer and stormwater lines, and building foundations.
Based on the observations and review of the EDR regulatory database report included in the Phase I ESA, no listings of concern were determined to be associated with the Development Area, adjacent properties, or properties located within the Development Area vicinity. The screening process for vapor migration in connection with the Development Area is described in the ASTM E 2600-10 Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions, an industry consensus methodology to assess vapor migration, which is not included in the scope of work of the Phase I ESA.
No engineering control sites, sites with institutional controls, or sites with deed restrictions were listed for the Development Area, adjacent sites or vicinity properties in the EDR Report.
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
The transportation of hazardous materials within the City of Clovis Planning Area is subject to various federal, State, and local regulations. The following provisions are included in the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and pertain to the transportation of hazardous related materials. • The Highway Patrol designates the routes in California which are to be used for the transportation of explosives. (Section 31616)
• The CVC applies when the explosives are transported as a delivery service for hire or in quantities in excess of 1,000 pounds. The transportation of explosives in quantities of 1,000 pounds or less, or other than on a public highway, is subject to the California Health and Safety Code. (Section 31601(a))
• It is illegal to transport explosives or inhalation hazards on any public highway not designated for that purpose, unless the use of the highway is required to permit delivery of, or the loading of, such materials. (Section 31602(b) and Section 32104(a)) • When transporting explosives through or into a city for which a route has not been designated by the Highway Patrol, drivers must follow routes as may be prescribed or established by local authorities. (Section 31614(a))
Inhalation hazards and poison gases are subject to additional safeguards. These materials are highly toxic, spread rapidly, and require rapid and widespread evacuation if there is loss of containment or a fire. The Highway Patrol designates through routes to be used for the transportation of inhalation hazards. It may also designate separate through routes for the transportation of inhalation hazards composed of any chemical rocket propellant. (Section 32100 and Section 32102(b))
FIRE HAZARDS
Wild fires are a major hazard in the State of California. Wild fires burn natural vegetation on developed and undeveloped lands and include timber, brush, woodland, and grass fires. While low intensity wild fires have a role in the County’s ecosystem, wild fires put human health and safety, structures (e.g., homes, schools, businesses, etc.), air quality, recreation areas, water quality, wildlife habitat and ecosystem health, and forest resources at risk. 549
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Wildland fire hazards exist in varying degrees in the foothill portion of the County located to the east and southwest of the Project site. In addition, the existing dead pecan orchard poses a potential fire hazard and as a precaution tree removal is in process, as well as the number of existing structures without sprinkler systems, are potential fire hazards. Nevertheless, the Project site is located in the valley floor, which is predominantly under agricultural or urban use, which is typically considered an area with a low fire hazard risk.
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
The State has charged the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) with the identification of Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) within State Responsibility Areas. In addition, CalFire must recommend Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) identified within any Local Responsibility Areas. The FHSZ maps are used by the State Fire Marshall as a basis for the adoption of applicable building code standards.
LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREAS
The Project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The Project site is not categorized as a "Very High" FHSZ by CalFire.
STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREAS
There are no State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) within the vicinity of the Project site.
FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY AREAS
There are no Federal Responsibility Areas (FRAs) within the vicinity of the Project site.
3.8.2 REGULATORY SETTING
FEDERAL
Aviation Act of 1958
The Federal Aviation Act resulted in the creation of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA is charged with the creation and maintenance of a National Airspace System.
Federal Aviation Regulations (CFR, Title 14)
The Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) establishes regulations related to aircraft, aeronautics, and inspection and permitting.
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 550
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-13 emissions standards and permits, acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection, and enforcement provisions.
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA), which amended the Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) of 1972, sets forth the §404 program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into Waters of the U.S. and the §402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to regulate the discharge of pollutants into Waters of the U.S. The §401 Water Quality Certification program establishes a framework of water quality protection for activities requiring a variety of Federal permits and approvals (including CWA §404, CWA §402, FERC Hydropower and §10 Rivers and Harbors).
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) introduced active Federal involvement to emergency response, site remediation, and spill prevention, most notably the Superfund program. The Act was intended to be comprehensive in encompassing both the prevention of, and response to, uncontrolled hazardous material releases.
CERCLA deals with environmental response, providing mechanisms for reacting to emergencies and to chronic hazardous material releases. In addition to establishing procedures to prevent and remedy problems, it establishes a system for compensating appropriate individuals and assigning appropriate liability. It is designed to plan for and respond to failure in other regulatory programs and to remedy problems resulting from action taken before the era of comprehensive regulatory protection.
Environmental Protection Agency
The primary regulator of hazards and hazardous materials is the EPA, whose mission is to protect human health and the environment. The City of Clovisis located within EPA Region 9, which includes Arizona, California, Hawaii, and New Mexico.
FY 2001 Appropriations Act
Title IV of the Appropriations Act required the identification of “Urban Wildland Interface Communities in the Vicinity of Federal Lands that are at High Risk from Wildfire” by the U.S.
Departments of the Interior and Agriculture.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, as amended, is the basic statute regulating hazardous materials transportation in the United States. The purpose of the law is to provide adequate protection against the risks to life and property inherent in transporting hazardous materials in interstate commerce. This law gives the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other agencies the authority to issue and enforce rules and regulations governing the safe transportation of hazardous materials (DOE 2002).
551
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
The Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act authorizes the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety to regulate pipeline transportation of natural (flammable, toxic, or corrosive) gas and other gases, as well as the transportation and storage of liquefied natural gas. The Office of Pipeline Safety regulates the design, construction, inspection, testing, operation, and maintenance of pipeline facilities. While the federal government is primarily responsible for developing, issuing, and enforcing pipeline safety regulations, the pipeline safety statutes provide for State assumption of the intrastate regulatory, inspection, and enforcement responsibilities under an annual certification.
To qualify for certification, a state must adopt the minimum federal regulations and may adopt additional or more stringent regulations as long as they are not incompatible.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The 1976 Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the 1984 RCRA Amendments regulate the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. The legislation mandated that hazardous wastes be tracked from the point of generation to their ultimate fate in the environment. This includes detailed tracking of hazardous materials during transport and permitting of hazardous material handling facilities.
The 1984 RCRA amendments provided the framework for a regulatory program designed to prevent releases from USTs. The program established tank and leak detection standards, including spill and overflow protection devices for new tanks. The tanks must also meet performance standards to ensure that the stored material will not corrode the tanks. The RCRA was further amended in 1988 to set additional standards for USTs.
In July 2015, the EPA revised the federal UST regulation, which strengthened the 1988 federal UST regulations by increasing emphasis on properly operating and maintaining UST equipment. The revision added new operation and maintenance requirements and addressed UST systems deferred in the 1988 UST regulation. The purpose of the revision was to help prevent and detect UST releases, which are a leading source of groundwater contamination. To ensure compliance performance measures reflect the 2015 UST regulation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials coordinated to update existing compliance performance measures and add new measures. The measures required states to switch from tracking compliance against significant operational compliance measures to the more stringent technical compliance rate (TCR) measures. As of June 2020, only 45.6 percent of USTs were in compliance with all TCR categories5.
5 EPA. Semiannual Report of UST Performance Measures Mid Fiscal Year 2020. June 2020. Access:
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-06/documents/ca-20-12.pdf 552
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-15 STATE
Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code §21001)
The Caltrans Division of Aeronautics bases the majority of its aviation policies on the Aeronautics Act. Policies include permits and annual inspections for public airports and hospital heliports and recommendations for schools proposed within two miles of airport runways.
Airport Land Use Commission Law (Public Utilities Code §21670 et seq.) The law, passed in 1967, authorized the creation of Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) in California. Per the Public Utilities Code, the purpose of an ALUC is to protect public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimizes exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses (Pub. Util. Code §21670).
Furthermore, each ALUC must prepare an ALUCP. Each ALUCP, which must be based on a twentyyear planning horizon, should focus on broadly defined noise and safety impacts.
Assembly Bill 337
Per AB 337, local fire prevention authorities and CalFire are required to identify Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) in LRAs. Standards related to brush clearance and the use of fireresistant materials in fire hazard severity zones are also established.
California Code of Regulations
Title 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) pertains to the application of pesticides and related chemicals. Parties applying regulated substances must continuously evaluate application equipment, the weather, the treated lands and all surrounding properties. Title 3 prohibits any application that would:
• Contaminate persons not involved in the application;
• Damage non-target crops or animals or any other public or private property; and • Contaminate public or private property or create health hazards on said property.
Title 8 of the CCR establishes California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal OSHA) requirements related to public and worker protection. Topics addressed in Title 8 include materials exposure limits, equipment requirements, protective clothing, hazardous materials, and accident prevention. Construction safety and exposure standards for lead and asbestos are set forth in Title
8. Title 14 of the CCR establishes minimum standards for solid waste handling and disposal.
Title 17 of the CCR establishes regulations relating to the use and disturbance of materials containing naturally occurring asbestos.
Title 19 of the CCR establishes a variety of emergency fire response, fire prevention, and construction and construction materials standards.
553
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Title 22 of the CCR sets forth definitions of hazardous waste and special waste. The section also identifies hazardous waste criteria and establishes regulations pertaining to the storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste.
Title 26 of the CCR is a medley of State regulations pertaining to hazardous materials and waste that are presented in other regulatory sections. Title 26 mandates specific management criteria related to hazardous materials identification, packaging, and disposal. In addition, Title 26 establishes requirements for hazardous materials transport, containment, treatment, and disposal. Finally, staff training standards are set forth in Title 26.
Title 27 of the CCR sets forth a variety of regulations relating to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the state’s landfills. The title establishes a landfill classification system and categories of waste. Each class of landfill is constructed to contain specific types of waste (household, inert, special, and hazardous).
California Government Code Section 65302
This section, which establishes standards for developing and updating General Plans, includes fire hazard assessment and Safety Element content requirements.
California Health and Safety Code
Division 11 of the Health and Safety Code establishes regulations related to a variety of explosive substances and devices, including high explosives and fireworks. Section 12000 et seq. establishes regulations related to explosives and explosive devices, including permitting, handling, storage, and transport (in quantities greater than 1,000 pounds).
Division 12 establishes requirements for buildings used by the public, including essential services buildings, earthquake hazard mitigation technologies, school buildings, and postsecondary buildings.
Division 20 establishes DTSC authority and sets forth hazardous waste and underground storage tank regulations. In addition, the division creates a State superfund framework that mirrors the Federal program.
Division 26 establishes California Air Resources Board (CARB) authority. The division designates CARB as the air pollution control agency per Federal regulations and charges the Board with meeting Clean Air Act requirements.
California Health and Safety Code and Uniform Building Code Section 13000 et seq.
State fire regulations are set forth in §13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which is divided into “Fires and Fire Protection” and “Buildings Used by the Public.” The regulations provide for the enforcement of the Uniform Building Code and mandate the abatement of fire hazards. 554
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-17 The code establishes broadly applicable regulations, such as standards for buildings and fire protection devices, in addition to regulations for specific land uses, such as childcare facilities and high-rise structures.
California Vehicle Code §31600 (Transportation of Explosives) This code establishes requirements related to the transportation of explosives in quantities greater than 1,000 pounds, including licensing and route identification.
California Public Resources Code
The State’s Fire Safety Regulations are set forth in Public Resources Code §4290, which include the establishment of SRAs.
Public Resources Code §4291 sets forth defensible space requirements, which are applicable to anyone who “…owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains a building or structure in, upon, or adjoining a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, brush-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable material” (§4291(a)).
Food and Agriculture Code
Division 6 of the California Food and Agriculture Code (FAC) establishes pesticide application regulations. The division establishes training standards for pilots conducting aerial applications, as well as permitting and certification requirements.
State Oversight of Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The DTSC is chiefly responsible for regulating the handling, use, and disposal of toxic materials. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulates discharge of potentially hazardous materials to waterways and aquifers and administers the basin plans for groundwater resources in the various regions of the state. The RWQCB oversees surface and groundwater. Programs intended to protect workers from exposure to hazardous materials and from accidental upset are covered under OSHA at the Federal and California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) and the California Department of Health Services (DHS) at the state level. Air quality is regulated through the CARB and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The State Fire Marshal is responsible for the protection of life and property through the development and application of fire prevention engineering, education, and enforcement; CalFire provides fire protection services for State and privately-owned wildlands.
Water Code
Division 7 of the California Water Code, commonly referred to as the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, created the SWRCB and the RWQCB. In addition, water quality responsibilities are established for the SWRCB and RWQCBs.
555
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North LOCAL
City of Clovis General Plan
POLICIES: ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY ELEMENT
• Policy 1.4 Facilities that use hazardous materials. Prohibit facilities using, storing, or otherwise involved with hazardous or toxic materials to be located in the 100-year flood zone, unless all standards of elevation, flood proofing and storage have been implemented. • Policy 2.1 Safe storage and maintenance. The use and storage of hazardous materials shall comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws to prevent and mitigate hazardous materials releases.
• Policy 2.2 Mitigation and remediation of groundwater contamination. Actively participate in local and regional efforts directed at mitigating environmental exposure to and cleaning up contaminated groundwater.
• Policy 2.3 Truck routes for hazardous materials. Maintain designated truck routes for the transportation of hazardous materials through the City. Discourage routes that pass through residential neighborhoods to the maximum extent feasible. • Policy 2.4 Hazardous materials response team. Maintain a Type 1 hazardous materials response team serving the City of Clovis.
• Policy 2.5 Safer Alternatives. Minimize the use of hazardous materials by encouraging the selection of non-toxic alternatives that do not pose a threat to the environment. • Policy 2.6 Community education. Provide educational resources to residents and businesses to promote safe practices related to the use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials.
• Policy 3.11 Airport land use compatibility. Approve land uses in a manner that is consistent with the Fresno Yosemite International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
POLICIES: PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
• Policy 6.8 Emergency preparedness planning. Maintain an emergency operations plan, an emergency operations center, and a hazard mitigation plan to prepare for actual or threatened conditions of disaster or extreme peril.
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA)
The California Environmental Protection Agency designates specific local agencies as Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA), typically at the county level. The FCEHS is the CUPA designated for Fresno County. The FCEHS is responsible for the implementation of statewide programs within its jurisdiction, including Underground storage of hazardous substances (USTs), Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMP) requirements, California Accidental Release Prevention (Cal-ARP) program, etc.
Implementation of these programs involves permitting, inspecting, providing education/guidance, investigations, and enforcement.
556
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-19 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) has jurisdiction over the City of Clovis and deals with pollutants that get into the air from stationary (including fumes, dust and smoke, some asbestos) and mobile sources. SJVAPCD’s mission is to improve the health and quality of life for all Valley residents through efficient, effective and entrepreneurial air quality management strategies.
SJVAPCD responds to complaints about smells, answers questions about air quality management permits, and reviews development projects for compliance with air quality and greenhouse gas significance thresholds. The SJVAPCD and air quality are addressed in detail in Section 3.3, Air Quality, of this EIR.
3.8.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact from hazards and hazardous materials if it will:
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;
• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment;
• For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area; • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or
• Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
557
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
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.
(Less than Significant with Mitigation)
CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS
Based on the review of historical aerial photographs, a site reconnaissance, and contacts with the local regulatory agencies, there is evidence that PAOCs exist in connection with the historical uses of the Development Area. During the course of the Phase I ESA, no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled RECs (CRECs) and historical RECs (HRECs) were identified in conjunction with the Development Area as defined by ASTM E 1527-13. However, the following potential areas of concern (PAOCs) are presented:
• Adjacent to the north of the on-site warehouse6 and lined against its back wall, three approximately 250-gallon aboveground storage (AST) tanks were observed. Two ASTs contained diesel fuel and the third contained gasoline. Additionally, four 55-gallon drums containing motor oil were observed to be located to the west of the ASTs, which exhibited minimis staining. The site reconnaissance was completed a day following a heavy rain event and it was not clear if the ground surface below the ASTs and/or drums exhibited any significant petroleum product staining because the ground remained saturated with rainwater precluding visual observations. Consequently, the specific condition of the ground surface underlying the ASTs and drums is unknown. The ASTs and drums are shown in Figure
3.8-1.
• The review of aerial photographs indicates that the Development Area was utilized for agricultural purposes from at least 1937 to the present and that residential structures and associated outbuildings occupied the property from at least 1937, 1979 and 1987 to the present. No records of USTs for the Development Area are on file with the local regulatory agencies; however, USTs on rural or agricultural properties historically have been exempt from requirements for registration with regulatory agencies. Furthermore, Kazan’s (the Phase I ESA author) experience with such properties has shown that it was not uncommon for property owners/operators to install USTs for their convenience, especially in the vicinity of structures, which are undocumented and whose presence would remain unknown in spite of the standard data research conducted in the course of this Phase I ESA. It is therefore possible that subsurface features such as unregistered fuel USTs may exist within the structure-related portions of the Development Area, which remain unknown based on the absence of any regulatory, municipality, and/or interview data, or other evidence indicating their presence or location. Consequently, despite an absence of data suggesting their 6 Note – this warehouse was removed in 2020.
558
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-21 presence, the presence or absence of USTs associated with on-site structures in a historical agricultural setting on the Development Area is unknown.
The following non-scope issues and site development issues are presented:
• A review of historical aerial photographs indicates the Development Area was utilized for agricultural purposes from at least 1937 to present. It is not known if environmentally persistent pesticides and/or herbicides were historically applied to the crops grown on the Development Area. Although the potential exists that environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides were historically applied to the crops grown on the Development Area, 1) no material evidence of the use of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides was obtained during the course of this assessment, 2) Krazan’s sampling analysis of surface soils from properties with similar agricultural histories in the Development Area has typically yielded nondetectable results or very low concentrations for analysis of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides, and 3) based upon the soil disturbance in conjunction with the grading and trenching activities during the proposed redevelopment of the Development Area, it is likely that potential agricultural chemicals would be significantly mixed and diluted. Consequently, given the above referenced factors and Krazan’s experience in the Development Area vicinity, which generally indicates that the potential is low for elevated concentrations of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides related to agricultural cultivation to exist in the near-surface soils of common agricultural ground at concentrations which would require regulatory action, despite the absence of specific data, the potential for elevated concentrations of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides to currently exist in the near-surface soils of the Development Area at concentrations, which would require regulatory action appears to be low. • Four pole-mounted transformers were observed on the Development Area. Two of the polemounted transformers were observed to be located in the central-eastern portion of the Development Area, and two were observed to be located along the eastern boundary on the southern portion of the Development Area. The transformer casings displayed no visual evidence of leakage and the ground surface below the transformers displayed no evidence of discoloration. Based on site observations made, the Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) Company is the owner of the transformers. The transformers were not labeled as to their polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) status. Based on the visual absence of apparent unauthorized releases of insulating fluids from the transformers at the time of the site reconnaissance, the transformers are not currently anticipated to pose an adverse impact to the Development Area. However, in the event of a future release/leak of insulating fluids from the transformers, PG&E should be contacted regarding the testing of the transformers for PCB fluids or for their removal/replacement (See Photographs No. 9, 38, 40, 58 in Appendix G). The pole-mounted transformers are shown in Figure 3.8-1. • Based on historical research and interviews, two domestic water wells and five agricultural water wells were observed to be associated with the Development Area. If the on-site water wells are not to be used in the future, they should be properly abandoned/destroyed in accordance with state and local guidelines. The wells are shown in Figure 3.8-1. 559
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Further, construction workers and the general public could be exposed to hazards and hazardous materials as a result of improper handling or use during construction activities (particularly by untrained personnel); transportation accidents; or fires, or other emergencies. Construction workers could also be exposed to hazards associated with accidental releases of hazardous materials, which could result in significant impacts to the health and welfare of people and/or wildlife. Additionally, an accidental release into the environment could result in the contamination of water, habitat, and countless resources. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board would require the preparation of a project specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP is required to include project specific best management measures that are designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using best management practices (BMPs) that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, and runoff during construction activities.
The proposed Project would also be required to comply with regulations on the transportation of hazardous materials codified in 49 CFR 173 and 49 CFR 177 and CCR Title 26, Division 6. These regulations, which are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the CHP, provide specific packaging requirements, define unacceptable hazardous materials shipments, and prescribe safe-transit practices by carriers of hazardous materials. Compliance with these regulations would reduce the risk of exposure to humans and the environment related to the transportation of hazardous materials.
Hazardous materials regulations, which are codified in CCR Titles 8 and 22, and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.5 (Section 25100 et seq.) of the California Health and Safety Code, were established at the State level to ensure compliance with federal regulations to reduce the risk to human health and the environment from the routine use of hazardous substances. Construction specifications would include the following requirements in compliance with applicable regulations and codes, including, but not limited to, CCR Titles 8 and 22, Uniform Fire Code, and Division 20 of the California Health and Safety Code: all reserve fuel supplies and hazardous materials must be stored within the confines of a designated construction area; equipment refueling and maintenance must take place only within the staging area; and construction vehicles shall be inspected daily for leaks. Off-site activities (e.g., utility construction) would also be required to comply with these regulations. These regulations and codes must be implemented, as appropriate, and are monitored by the State and/or local jurisdictions, including the FCEHS.
Contractors would be required to comply with Cal-EPA’s Unified Program; regulated activities would be managed by FCEHS, the designated Certified Unified Program Agency for Fresno County, in accordance with the regulations included in the Unified Program (e.g., hazardous materials release response plans and inventories, California UFC hazardous material management plans and inventories).
Mitigation Measure 3.8-1 was developed to ensure that a well abandonment permit is obtained from Fresno County Department of Public Health Environmental Health Division, and that all on-site wells are properly abandoned. Mitigation Measure 3.8-2 was developed to ensure that additional testing is performed prior to the issuance of grading permits for construction activities in several areas that have been deemed to have potentially hazardous conditions present. The additional 560
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-23 testing will investigate whether any of these areas contain hazardous materials that need special treatments. Mitigation Measure 3.8-2 also specifies that all construction or demolition activities comply with Cal/OSHA asbestos and lead worker construction standards, and offsite disposal requirements. This measure also provides specifications for additional soil sampling in stained areas prior to soil disturbance activities. Overall, consistency with federal, State, and local laws and regulations related to the handling of hazardous materials discussed above and implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8-1 and 3.8-2 would ensure that potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.8-1: Prior to the acceptance of improvements, the Project proponentshall 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.
• 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.
561
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Further, in the event of a future release/leak of insulating fluids from any of the four pole-mounted transformers, PG&E shall be contacted regarding the testing of the transformers for PCB fluids or for their removal/replacement.
OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS
The operational phase of the proposed Project will occur after construction is completed and residents move in to occupy the structures on a day-to-day basis.
The proposed Project includes the development of residential structures. Each of these uses will likely use a variety of hazardous materials commonly found in urban areas including: paints, cleaners, and cleaning solvents. If handled appropriately, these materials do not pose a significant risk. These facilities will store and use these materials. There will be a risk of release of these materials into the environment if they are not stored and handled in accordance with best management practices approved by FCEHS and the Clovis Fire Department. Overall, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this issue.
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. (Less than Significant) The nearest school to the Project site is the Woods Elementary School, located approximately 0.66 miles southwest of the Project site. Other schools near the Project site include: Dry creek Elementary School (1.25 miles southeast), Century Elementary School (1.28 miles south), and Buchanan High School (1.29 miles southwest). There are a variety of other schools located beyond three miles from the Project site.
The proposed Project includes the development of up to 605 residential units. Household wastes generated from residential uses include pesticides, batteries, old paint, solvents, used oil, antifreeze, and other chemicals that typically do not pose a significant threat of emitting hazardous emissions or materials with proper disposal. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collection Facilities receive hazardous waste that comes from homes and, in some cases, from small business hazardous waste generators. These HHW facilities are intended to provide a local facility for residents to easily dispose of household wastes, including those described above, so that they do not end up be illegally disposed of in places that could result in more serious pollution Therefore, there is not a higher risk of household hazardous materials being released within the Project site. Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
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. (Less than Significant)
The hazards assessment included a site reconnaissance, interviews, historical land use research, and database research. The assessment revealed no evidence of historical or existing Recognized Environmental Conditions in connection with the Project site. The Project site is not on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, 562
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.8-25 Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
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 (Less than Significant)
There are no documented public airports or public use airports within close proximity to the Project site. The nearest airport facility within the vicinity of the Project site is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, located approximately six miles south. The Project site is not located within the airport influence area or within the Airport’s noise exposure contours for the Fresno Yosemite International Airport as identified in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Therefore, Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
Impact 3.8-5: Potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (Less than Significant)
The Fresno County Master Emergency Services Plan serves as the Emergency Plan for Fresno County.
This plan serves as a guide for response to an emergency/disaster in the unincorporated areas of the Fresno County Operational Area, and to coordinate and assist with the disaster response in jurisdictions both within and outside of the Fresno County Operational Area. In addition to the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, hazard specific response plans and standard operating procedures (SOP) have been developed or are in the process of development to supplement this master plan with disaster/emergency specific response procedures and information.
The County also prepared a Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan underwent a comprehensive update in 2017-2018 building upon the plan that was originally developed in 2009. This plan demonstrates the community’s commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision makers direct mitigation activities and resources. This plan was also developed to make Fresno County and participating jurisdictions eligible for certain federal disaster assistance, specifically, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA). This plan also meets the planning requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System (CRS), in order to earn points under CRS Activity 510, which could lower flood insurance premiums in CRS communities.
In Fresno County, all major roads are available for evacuation, depending on the location and type of emergency that arises. The proposed Project does not include any actions that would impair or physically interfere with any of Fresno County’s emergency plans or evacuation routes. Future uses on the Project site will have access to the County resources that establish protocols for safe use, handling and transport of hazardous materials. Construction activities are not expected to result in 563
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North any unknown significant road closures, traffic detours, or congestion that could hinder the emergency vehicle access or evacuation in the event of an emergency. Any construction project that could involve road closures, traffic detours and congestion, shall be required to obtain traffic control plans approved by the City as the lead agency. Therefore, Development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
Impact 3.8-6: Potential to expose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury or death from wildland fires. (Less than Significant) The risk of wildfire is related to a variety of parameters, including fuel loading (vegetation), fire weather (winds, temperatures, humidity levels and fuel moisture contents) and topography (degree of slope). Steep slopes contribute to fire hazard by intensifying the effects of wind and making fire suppression difficult. Fuels such as grass are highly flammable because they have a high surface area to mass ratio and require less heat to reach the ignition point. The County has areas with an abundance of flashy fuels (i.e. grassland) in the foothill areas of the County.
Wildfires are a potential hazard to development, including land uses located in the foothill and forested areas of the City. The severity of wildfire problems depends on a combination of vegetation, climate, slope, and people. The vegetation and topography found in the eastern portions of the City, coupled with hot, dry summers, present fire hazards during critical fire periods for much of the county. In addition to natural factors such as lightning, human activity is a primary factor contributing to the incidence of wildfires. Campfires, smoking, debris burning, arson, public utility infrastructure, and equipment use are common human-related causes of wildfires.
The Project site is not categorized as a “Very High” FHSZ by CalFire. The Project site is not located within an LRA and is categorized as Urban Unzoned or Non-Wildland/Non-Urban.
The Project site is located in an area that is predominately single-family residential uses, which do not pose a significant risk of wildfire. The proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
564
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LEGEND
Figure 3.8-1. Site Observations
SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
Sources: Krazan & Associates, Inc. Map date: November 9, 2022. *
*Note: The two residences and warehouse were removed in 2020. *
565
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
566
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.9-1 This section describes the regulatory setting, regional hydrology and water quality, impacts that are likely to result from project implementation, and measures to reduce potential impacts to water quality. This section is based in part on the following documents, reports and studies:
• 2014 Clovis General Plan (Placeworks, 2014);
• 2014 Clovis General Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Placeworks, 2014); • Fresno-Clovis Storm Water Quality Management Program (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, 2013);
• California’s Groundwater: Bulletin 118 - San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin/Kings Subbasin (DWR 2006);
• City of Clovis Urban Water Management Plan 2020 Update (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B)
3.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
REGIONAL HYDROLOGY
The San Joaquin Valley is surrounded on the west by the Coast Ranges, on the south by the San Emigdio and Tehachapi Mountains, on the east by the Sierra Nevada and on the north by the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Sacramento Valley. The northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley drains toward the Delta by the San Joaquin River and its tributaries, the Fresno, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers. The southern portion of the valley is internally drained by the Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Kern Rivers that flow into the Tulare drainage basin, including the beds of the former Tulare, Buena Vista, and Kern Lakes.
The San Joaquin and Kings Rivers are the two principal rivers within or bordering the Kings subbasin, where the City of Clovis is located. The Fresno Slough and James Bypass are along the western edge of the subbasin and connect the Kings River with the San Joaquin River. Average annual precipitation values range from seven to 10 inches, increasing eastward.
Watersheds
A watershed is a region that is bound by a divide that drains to a common watercourse or body of water. Watersheds serve an important biological function, oftentimes supporting an abundance of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife including special-status species and anadromous and native local fisheries. Watersheds provide conditions necessary for riparian habitat.
The State of California uses a hierarchical naming and numbering convention to define watershed areas for management purposes. This means that boundaries are defined according to size and topography, with multiple sub-watersheds within larger watersheds. Table 3.9-1 shows the primary watershed classification levels used by the State of California. The second column indicates the approximate size that a watershed area may be within a particular classification level, although variation in size is common.
567
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North TABLE 3.9-1. STATE OF CALIFORNIA WATERSHED HIERARCHY NAMING CONVENTION
WATERSHED LEVEL
APPROXIMATE
SQUARE MILES
(ACRES)
DESCRIPTION
Hydrologic Region (HR) 12,735
(8,150,000)
Defined by large-scale topographic and geologic
considerations. The State of California is divided into ten HRs.
Hydrologic Unit (HU) 672
(430,000)
Defined by surface drainage; may include a major river
watershed, groundwater basin, or closed drainage, among others.
Hydrologic Area (HA) 244
(156,000)
Major subdivisions of hydrologic units, such as by major tributaries, groundwater attributes, or stream components.
Hydrologic Sub-Area (HSA) 195
(125,000)
A major segment of an HA with significant geographical
characteristics or hydrological homogeneity.
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, 2012.
Hydrologic Region
The City of Clovisis located in the Tulare Lake Hydrological Region, which covers about 16,800 square miles and includes all of Kings and Tulare counties and most of Fresno and Kern counties (Department of Water Resources, 2015). The hydrologic region is bordered to the east by the Sierra Nevada, to the west by the Coast Ranges, and to the south by the Tehachapi Mountains. To the north, the Tulare Lake region is separated from the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region (San Joaquin region) by a rise in the San Joaquin Valley floor caused by an accumulation of San Joaquin River and the Kings River alluvial fan deposits. Although this drainage divide is the boundary between the San Joaquin and Tulare Lake regions, geographically the valley floor portion of the Tulare Lake region is considered part of the southern San Joaquin Valley. Major rivers draining into the Tulare Lake region include the Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Kern, which extend from the Sierra Nevada headwaters in eastern Fresno and Tulare counties, to their termination at the former Tulare Lake and Buena Vista Lake beds.
As shown in Figure 3.9-1, the Project site is located in the James Bypass watershed.
Groundwater
Clovis is underlain by the Kings Groundwater Subbasin. The Kings Subbasin is bounded on the north by the San Joaquin River, on the west by the Delta-Mendota and Westside Subbasins, the south by the Kings River South Fork and the Empire West Side Irrigation District, and on the east by the Sierra Nevada foothills.
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. 568
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-3 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.
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 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.
Drainage
Stormwater runoff in the City of Clovis is conveyed through a system of street gutters, underground storm drains, retention/detention basins, pumping stations, and open channels that are maintained by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD). The FMFCD provides flood control and urban storm water services in a 399-square mile watershed located between the Kings and San Joaquin Rivers (FMFCD, 2022a). The Fresno/Clovis urban area is served by a system of roughly 700 miles of pipeline and more than 150 stormwater retention basins. FMFCD’s stormwater drainage system discharges to irrigation canals, creeks, and the San Joaquin River (FMFCD, 2013). The system is designed to retain and infiltrate as much runoff as possible into the underlying groundwater aquifer. On average, FMFCD’s regional stormwater basin system captures 92 percent of annual rainfall, of which, 70-85 percent of the captured stormwater runoff is recharged into the local groundwater aquifer (FMFCD, 2020). The stormwater basins also remove 50-80 percent of the typical stormwater pollutants.
The District Master Plan storm drainage pipeline system is designed to accept the peak flow rate of runoff from a two-year intensity storm event (a storm that has a 50 percent probability of occurring in any given year) (FMFCD, 2022b). When storm events occur that exceed the two-year intensity, ponding begins to occur in the streets until the pipeline system can remove the water. If the storm is of sufficient intensity to generate more water than the street can store, the water will continue 569
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North to rise until it reaches a topographic outlet where it can escape down gradient. This escape route is a feature of the major storm routing system, implemented in 1998, that protects properties from damage in rainfall or runoff events that exceed system design capacities. The Project site is located within Drainage Area BY1.
Water Supplies
SURFACE WATER SUPPLY
The City has access to surface water through several different contracts, all of which are delivered to the City by the Fresno Irrigation District (FID). The various surface water supplies are from the Kings River and Central Valley Project. The average delivery the City has received of its total allocation is just over 17,000 AF per year, with the smallest delivery being 9,452 AF in 2015 and the largest of 24,958 in 2017. The City executed a new, firm water supply, agreement with FID in 2019 that provides a surface water supply that does not fluctuate with the FID entitlement or allocation and will be available to the City on a consistent basis. This agreement provides for up to 7,000 AF per year by 2045, beginning at 1,000 AF in 2020. As the City grows and annexes portions of the Garfield and International Water Districts, those CVP, Class I water rights will be transferred to the City and added to the overall water supply portfolio. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
FID’s average gross annual entitlement is 452,541 AF. Within the last fifty years, the smallest entitlement received was 158,109 AF, which occurred in 2015. The City’s allocation from the Kings River is proportional to the total acreage of the City's included area to the total FID area receiving water. Over time, the City has received on average 17,011 AFY, though this has varied from 9,452 AF in the severe drought of 2015 to over 24,958 AF in 2017. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Two additional water districts are located within the City’s General Plan Boundaries: Garfield Water District (GWD) and International Water District (IWD). Both have access to Class I CVP surface water supplies. The GWD holds a Class 1 CVP contract for 3,500 AFY. With half of GWD within the City’s SOI, an estimated 1,750 AFY is expected to be added to the City’s supply upon development. The IWD holds a Class 1 CVP contract for 1,200 AFY. The City’s General Plan designates a portion of the District’s area as industrial and residential use. At build-out, it is estimated that the entire 1,200 AFY supply will be added to the City’s Supply. As the districts urbanize, supplies associated with these areas are expected to be added to the City’s supply. The City uses their surface water supplies in two primary ways: (1) as potable water supply after being treated at the City’s Surface Water Treatment Plant (SWTP) or (2) as groundwater recharge in various basins located in and around the City’s service area. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
GROUNDWATER SUPPLY
The City’s groundwater supplies stem from the basin underlying the area, the Kings Subbasin; the Subbasin holds a status of being critically over drafted. The Kings Subbasin, a non-adjudicated basin, is a high-priority basin, which lies within the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Basin. This Basin contains multiple interconnected subbasins that transmit, filter and store water. These subbasins are Kaweah and Tulare Lake to the south, Westside and Delta Mendota to the west, and Madera to the North. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
570
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-5 The Kings Subbasin (Subbasin 5-22.08) covers a surface area of approximately 976,000 acres (1,530 square miles). The Department of Water Resources estimated that the total basin storage was about 93,000,000 AF to a depth of more than 1,000 feet. The two major rivers overlying the subbasin are the San Joaquin River and Kings River. The Fresno Slough and James Bypass are along the western edge of the southern basin and connect the Kings River to the San Joaquin River. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
The subbasin does have localized water quality impairments, including Dibromochloropropane (DBCP); Nitrate; Ethylene-Dibromide; 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP); Methyl Tert-butyl Ether (MTBE); uranium; arsenic; hexavalent chromium; perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and petroleum hydrocarbons. High concentrations of fluoride, boron, and sodium can be found in localized areas of the subbasin. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
In 2014, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law to provide a framework for management of groundwater supplies by local agencies and restricts state intervention, if required. SGMA provides an opportunity for local agencies overlying the basin to form a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), which is the primary agency responsible for achieving sustainability. As part of the region’s compliance with SGMA, the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (NKGSA) was formed and includes representatives from Bakman Water Company, Biola Community Services District, City of Fresno, City of Clovis, City of Kerman, County of Fresno, Fresno Irrigation District, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Garfield Water District, and International Water District. The North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency adopted a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) in late 2019.
North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency
The City is a member of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (NKGSA). The NKGSA is working collaboratively, under a coordination agreement with the other six (6) Groundwater Sustainability Agencies in the Kings Subbasin to achieve sustainable groundwater conditions by 2040, in accordance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) for critically over drafted groundwater basins such as the Kings Subbasin. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
SGMA identifies six (6) sustainability indicators to be monitored and reported in order to document sustainability: lowering groundwater levels, reduced [groundwater] storage, seawater intrusion, degraded [groundwater] quality, land subsidence, and surface water depletion. The NKGSA documents five (5) of those with seawater intrusion not being applicable to this region. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
The City will continue increasing its surface water and recycled water supply usage to a point where the groundwater extraction is not greater than the sustainable yield in a normal year. The sustainable yield is currently estimated at 9,400 AF per year (AFY) for the SOI). (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Potable water production consists of municipal groundwater wells and a surface water treatment plant (SWTP). The total groundwater pumping that occurs within the City boundaries include City-owned municipal wells and City-owned park irrigation wells. The following section provides a 571
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North summary of the estimated groundwater pumping that occurs within the current City limits and planning area.
City-Produced Groundwater
The City’s system contains more than 30 wells with a total capacity of approximately 37,690 gallons per minute with another 4,750 gpm of additional capacity planned in the next few years. In 2020, the City extracted 12,105 AF and conducted 5,316 AF of intentional recharge activities, which put the net extraction below the sustainable yield. It is presently understood that 9,400 AF per year can be sustainably used from the aquifer. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Wells are spaced at intervals across the City and are connected to a distribution system. The pipes are sized for local distribution and have, in certain instances, presented some restrictions to crosstown water supply distribution. The transmission network consists primarily of 12-inch mains on a one-half mile grid with extensive looping. The wells are controlled by a telemetry system that controls pump operation as well as independent controls in case of remote computer failure. (Provost & Pritchard, 2017).
As of 2016, there are 34 wells operating in the City of Clovis system. Of these 34 wells, there are two functioning for standby purposes only. There are also three additional wells operating within the Tarpey system. Typically, wells are put on standby status as a result of water quality problems and are maintained for emergency use. The production rate of the existing wells varies from approximately 300 gallons per minute (gpm) to approximately 2,200 gpm. The total production for the City of Clovis in the year 2014 was approximately 15,500 acre-feet. The Tarpey Village wells accounted for approximately 540 acre-feet of this total. (Provost & Pritchard, 2017).
Existing wells are not evenly distributed across the service area, but rather generally located in the western one-half of the City of Clovis. In general, older wells are in the southwest quarter of the City and the newest wells are located to the northwest quarter of the City. The northern portion of the City of Clovis (north of Herndon Avenue), has experienced the highest growth in recent years, and has dramatically shifted the production and demand characteristics of the City’s water system. (Provost & Pritchard, 2017).
Pumping rates for individual City wells in recent years have ranged from about 200 gpm to almost 1,500 gpm. However, the pumping rates for most wells have ranged from about 600 to 1,300 gpm. (Provost & Pritchard, 2017).
The average water level-decline in the City’s wells from 2007 to 2014 was 1.5 feet per year. These wells represent an area of about 15,200 acres. When extrapolated over the acreage associated with the SOI boundary (21,100 acres) and the General Plan boundary (47,500 acres), the change in storage is 3,800 and 8,550 acre-feet per year, respectively. (Provost & Pritchard, 2017).
HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER PUMPING
The water system was initially constructed near the turn of the 20th century, when the first municipal well was installed, and, up until July 2004, the City’s sole source of drinking water was groundwater. The City currently obtains groundwater from 36 active wells and one standby well, 572
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-7 which have a total capacity of approximately 37,690 gallons per minute (gpm). There are also six planned wells, adding an additional planned capacity of 4,750 gpm, bringing the total well capacity to 42,440 gpm. Two of the existing active wells (Wells 10 and T-5) are offline due to TCP and PFAS water quality concerns, and one well is listed as standby due to iron and manganese concerns. TCP, PFAS, DBCP and high iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) are the main water quality constraints in the Clovis area. Five (5) more of the City’s wells are currently on inactive status due to being dry or producing too much sand (Wells 3, 11, 33, T-1, and T-3). (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
In 2020, groundwater provided approximately 49 percent of the total potable water use. The historical volume of groundwater pumped by the City over the past five years is ranged from 10,956 in 2019 to as high as 13,187 in 2016. The groundwater extraction has reduced since 2016 and is expected to continue to be reduced, as discussed later in this section. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
In 2020, recharge was 5,316 AF, while the City’s 30-year average groundwater recharge quantity is approximately 8,412 AFY. In the past 30 years, the groundwater table has dropped 48 feet, from a depth of 92 feet in 1991 to a depth of 140 feet in 2019. Recharge efforts began in 1974, and in 2004, the City began utilizing surface water with the goal of reducing groundwater extraction. Recharge efforts by the City have not been enough to stem the decline as the basin is shared with other users who either don’t recharge or inadequately recharge. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT
A more complete analysis of the water demand and supply for the City of Clovis and the proposed Project is provided in Section 3.14 Utilities.
Flooding
Flooding events can result in damage to structures, injury or loss of human and animal life, exposure of waterborne diseases, and damage to infrastructure. In addition, standing floodwater can destroy agricultural crops, undermine infrastructure and structural foundations, and contaminate groundwater.
Regionally, the major flood issues are associated with the San Joaquin River, the Kings River, and their tributaries. Three major dams have been constructed to control flows on the rivers, including Friant and Mendota Dams on the San Joaquin River and Pine Flat Dam on the Kings River. In addition, a number of reservoirs, detention basins, and canals have been constructed on streams east of the Fresno-Clovis area to prevent flooding and to convey flows around developed areas.
The majority of the Project site is located within the 500-year flood zone (Zone X), which depicts areas with a 0.2-percent (500-year) annual chance flood. The northern and northeastern portion of the Project site, largely outside the Development Area, is within the 100-year flood zone (Zone AH).
It is noted that a small portion in the north of the Development Area is within the 100-year flood zone. Figure 3.9-2 shows the 100- and 500-year flood boundaries. The majority of the Development Area within the Project site is located in an area designated to have a minimal flood hazard. 573
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
DAM FAILURE
The Project site is located within dam failure inundation areas. Potential inundation from the Big Dry Creek Dam is shown in Figure 3.9-3. Dam failure is generally a result of structural instability caused by improper design or construction, instability resulting from seismic shaking, or overtopping and erosion of the dam. Larger dams that are higher than 25 feet or with storage capacities over 50 acre-feet of water are regulated by the California Dam Safety Act, which is implemented by the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (DSD). The DSD is responsible for inspecting and monitoring these dams. The Act also requires that dam owners submit to the California Office of Emergency Services inundation maps for dams that would cause significant loss of life or personal injury as a result of dam failure. The County Office of Emergency Services is responsible for developing and implementing a Dam Failure Plan that designates evacuation plans, the direction of floodwaters, and provides emergency information.
SEICHE
Seiches are changes or oscillations of water levels within a confined water body. Seiches are caused by fluctuation in the atmosphere, tidal currents or earthquakes. The effect of this phenomenon is a standing wave that would occur when influences by the external causes. Large, inland bodies of water that could generate seiches are retention basins and reservoirs, including the Big Dry Creek Dam, located approximately one mile northeast of the Project site.
TSUNAMI
A tsunami is a sea wave caused by a submarine earthquake, landslide, or volcanic eruption. A tsunami can cause catastrophic damage to shallow or exposed shorelines. The Project site is approximately 117 miles from the coastline of the Pacific Ocean, which is sufficiently distant to preclude effects from a tsunami.
MUDFLOW
A mudflow is a type of mass wasting or landslide, where earth and surface materials are rapidly transported downhill under the force of gravity. Mudflow events are caused by a combination of factors, including soil type, soil profile, precipitation, and slope. Mudflow may be triggered by heavy rainfall that the soil is not able to sufficiently drain or absorb. As a result of this super-saturation, soil and rock materials become unstable and eventually slide away from their existing location. Soils most susceptible to mudflow are saturated, loose, non-plastic, uniformly graded, and fine-grained sand deposits. The Project site is relatively flat making the potential of mudflows low.
Stormwater Quality
Surface water quality is affected by point source and non-point source pollutants. Point source pollutants are those emitted at a specific point, such as a pipe, while non-point source pollutants are typically generated by surface runoff from diffuse sources, such as streets, paved areas, and landscaped areas. Point source pollutants are controlled with pollutant discharge regulations or waste discharge requirements (WDRs). Non-point source pollutants are more difficult to monitor and control, although they are important contributors to surface water quality in urban areas. 574
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-9 Stormwater runoff pollutants vary based on land use, topography, the amount of impervious surface, and the amount and frequency of rainfall and irrigation practices. Runoff in developed areas typically contains oil, grease, and metals accumulated in streets, driveways, parking lots, and rooftops, as well as pesticides, herbicides, particulate matter, nutrients, animal waste, and other oxygen-demanding substances from landscaped areas. The highest pollutant concentrations usually occur at the beginning of the wet season during the “first flush.” 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
Water quality in the City is governed by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) (Region 5), which sets water quality standards in their Water Quality Control Plan for the respective basins (Basin Plans). The Basin Plans identify beneficial uses for surface water and groundwater and establish water quality objectives to attain those beneficial uses.
Section 303(d) of the federal CWA requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.
There are several areas within Fresno County which are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. Those areas include Fresno Slough, Hume Lake, James Bypass, Kings River, Long Meadow Creek, Los Gatos Creek, Mill Creek, Panoche Creek, Pine Flat Reservoir, Ramona Lake, and an unnamed tributary near Table Mountain Rancheria. The pollutant categories include: pesticides, nutrients, metals, pathogens, salinity, sediment, and total toxics. The pollutants include:
chlorpyrifos, dissolved oxygen, pH, toxicity, alkalinity as CaCO3, selenium, mercury, sedimentation/siltation, lead, and indicator bacteria.
Storm water runoff may play a role in the water quality impairments described above. Runoff that occurs as overland flow across yards, driveways, and public streets is intercepted by the storm water drainage system and conveyed to local drainages before eventually being routed to the Pacific. This storm water can carry pollutants that can enter the local waterways and result in the types of water quality impairments described above. Common sources of storm water pollution in the City include litter, trash, pet waste, paint residue, organic material (yard waste), fertilizers, pesticides, sediments, construction debris, metals from automobile brake pad dust, air pollutants that settle on the ground or attach to rainwater, cooking grease, illegally dumped motor oil, and other harmful fluids.
Potential hazards to surface water quality include the following nonpoint pollution problems: high turbidity from sediment resulting from erosion of improperly graded construction projects, concentration of nitrates and dissolved solids from agriculture or surfacing septic tank failures, contaminated street and lawn run-off from urban areas, and warm water drainage discharges into cold water streams.
The most critical period for surface water quality is following a rainstorm, which produces significant amounts of drainage runoff into streams at low flow, resulting in poor dilution of contaminates in 575
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North the low flowing stream. Such conditions are most frequent during the fall at the beginning of the rainy season when stream flows are near their lowest annual levels. Besides the greases, oils, pesticides, litter, and organic matter associated with such runoff, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and cadmium can cause considerable harm to aquatic organisms when introduced to streams in low flow conditions.
Urban stormwater runoff was managed as a non-point discharge (a source not readily identifiable) under the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, Section 208) until the mid-1980s. However, since then, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency has continued to develop implementing rules, which categorize urban runoff as a point source (an identifiable source) subject to NPDES permits. Rules now affect medium and large urban areas, and further rulemaking is expected as programs are developed to meet requirements of Federal water pollution control laws.
Surface water pollution is also caused by erosion. Excessive and improperly managed grading, vegetation removal, quarrying, logging, and agricultural practices all lead to increased erosion of exposed earth and sedimentation of watercourses during rainy periods. In slower moving water bodies, these same factors often cause a buildup of siltation, which ultimately reduces the capacity of the water system to percolate and recharge groundwater basins, as well as adversely affecting both aquatic resources and flood control efforts.
3.9.2 REGULATORY SETTING
There are a number of regulatory agencies whose responsibility includes the oversight of the water resources of the state and nation including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources Board, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The following is an overview of the federal, state and local regulations that are applicable to the proposed Project.
FEDERAL
Clean Water Act
The CWA, initially passed in 1972, regulates the discharge of pollutants into watersheds throughout the nation. Section 402(p) of the act establishes a framework for regulating municipal and industrial stormwater discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. Section 402(p) requires that stormwater associated with industrial activity that discharges either directly to surface waters or indirectly through municipal separate storm sewers must be regulated by an NPDES permit.
The CWA establishes the basic structure for regulating the discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and gives the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to implement pollution control programs. The statute’s goal is to regulate all discharges into the nation’s waters and to restore, maintain, and preserve the integrity of those waters. The CWA sets water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters and mandates permits for wastewater and stormwater discharges.
576
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-11 The CWA also requires states to establish site-specific water quality standards for navigable bodies of water and regulates other activities that affect water quality, such as dredging and the filling of wetlands. The following CWA sections assist in ensuring water quality for the water of the United States:
CWA Section 208 requires the use of best management practices (BMPs) to control the discharge of pollutants in stormwater during construction. CWA Section 303(d) requires the creation of a list of impaired water bodies by states, territories, and authorized tribes; evaluation of lawful activities that may impact impaired water bodies, and preparation of plans to improve the quality of these water bodies. CWA Section 303(d) also establishes TMDLs, which is the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still safely meet water quality standards. CWA Section 404 authorizes the US Army Corps of Engineers to require permits that will discharge, dredge or fill materials into waters in the US, including wetlands.
In California, the EPA has designated the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) with the authority to identify beneficial uses and adopt applicable water quality objectives.
The SWRCB is responsible for implementing the CWA and does so through issuing NPDES permits to cities and counties through regional water quality control boards. Federal regulations allow two permitting options for storm water discharges (individual permits and general permits).
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEMA operates the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Participants in the NFIP must satisfy certain mandated floodplain management criteria. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 has adopted as a desired level of protection, an expectation that developments should be protected from floodwater damage of the Intermediate Regional Flood (IRF). The IRF is defined as a flood that has an average frequency of occurrence on the order of once in 100 years, although such a flood may occur in any given year. Communities are occasionally audited by the California Department of Water Resources to insure the proper implementation of FEMA floodplain management regulations.
Flood Control Act
The Flood Control Act (1917) established survey and cost estimate requirements for flood hazards in the Sacramento Valley. All levees and structures constructed per the Act were to be maintained locally, but controlled federally. All rights of way necessary for the construction of flood control infrastructure were to be provided to the Federal government at no cost.
Federal involvement in the construction of flood control infrastructure, primarily dams and levees, became more pronounced upon passage of the Flood Control Act of 1936.
Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA)
The FDPA of 1973 was a response to the shortcomings of the NFIP, which were experienced during the flood season of 1972. The FDPA prohibited Federal assistance, including acquisition, construction, and financial assistance, within delineated floodplains in non-participating NFIP 577
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North communities. Furthermore, all Federal agencies and/or federally insured and federally regulated lenders must require flood insurance for all acquisitions or developments in designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in communities that participate in the NFIP.
Improvements, construction, and developments within SFHAs are generally subject to the following standards:
• All new construction and substantial improvements of residential buildings must have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the base flood elevation (BFE). • All new construction and substantial improvements of non-residential buildings must either have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the BFE or dry-floodproofed to the BFE.
• Buildings can be elevated to or above the BFE using fill, or they can be elevated on extended foundation walls or other enclosure walls, on piles, or on columns. • Extended foundation or other enclosure walls must be designed and constructed to withstand hydrostatic pressure and be constructed with flood-resistant materials and contain openings that will permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters. Any enclosed area below the BFE can only be used for the parking of vehicles, building access, or storage.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Per the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, the NFIP has three fundamental purposes: Better indemnify individuals for flood losses through insurance; Reduce future flood damages through State and community floodplain management regulations; and Reduce Federal expenditures for disaster assistance and flood control.
While the Act provided for subsidized flood insurance for existing structures, the provision of flood insurance by FEMA became contingent on the adoption of floodplain regulations at the local level.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) NPDES permits are required for discharges to navigable waters of the United States, which includes any discharge to surface waters, including lakes, rivers, streams, bays, oceans, dry stream beds, wetlands, and storm sewers that are tributary to any surface water body. NPDES permits are issued under the Federal CWA, Title IV, Permits and Licenses, Section 402 (33 USC 466 et seq.) The RWQCB issues these permits in lieu of direct issuance by the Environmental Protection Agency, subject to review and approval by the EPA Regional Administrator (EPA Region 9). The terms of these NPDES permits implement pertinent provisions of the Federal CWA and the Act’s implementing regulations, including pre-treatment, sludge management, effluent limitations for specific industries, and anti-degradation. In general, the discharge of pollutants is to be eliminated or reduced as much as practicable so as to achieve the CWA’s goal of “fishable and swimmable” navigable (surface) waters. Technically, all NPDES permits issued by the RWQCB are also Waste Discharge Requirements issued under the authority of the CWA. 578
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-13 These NPDES permits regulate discharges from publicly owned treatment works, industrial discharges, stormwater runoff, dewatering operations, and groundwater cleanup discharges. NPDES permits are issued for five years or less and are therefore to be updated regularly. The rapid and dramatic population and urban growth in the Central Valley Region has caused a significant increase in NPDES permit applications for new waste discharges. To expedite the permit issuance process, the SWRCB has adopted several general NPDES permits, each of which regulates numerous discharges of similar types of wastes. The SWRCB has issued general permits for stormwater runoff from industrial and construction sites statewide. Stormwater discharges from industrial and construction activities in the Central Valley Region can be covered under these general permits, which are administered jointly by the SWRCB and RWQCB.
Individual projects in the City that disturb more than one acre would be required to obtain NPDES coverage under the California General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit). The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) describing Best Management Practices (BMP) the discharger would use to prevent and retain storm water runoff. The SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for “non-visible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a waterbody listed on the 303(d) list for sediment.
Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899
One of the country’s first environmental laws, this Act established a regulatory program to address activities that could affect navigation in Waters of the United States.
Water Pollution Control Act of 1972
The Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) established a program to regulate activities that result in the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States STATE
California Fish and Wildlife Code
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protects streams, water bodies, and riparian corridors through the streambed alteration agreement process under Section 1600 to 1616 of the California Fish and Game Code. The California Fish and Game Code establishes that ”an entity may not substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river stream, or lake” (Fish and Game Code Section 1602(a)) without notifying the CDFW, incorporating necessary mitigation and obtaining a streambed alteration agreement. The CDFWs jurisdiction extends to the top of banks and often includes the outer edge of riparian vegetation canopy cover. 579
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North California Code of Regulations
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, Chapter 15, Article 20 requires all public water systems to prepare a Consumer Confidence Report for distribution to its customers and to the Department of Health Services. The Consumer Confidence Report provides information regarding the quality of potable water provided by the water system. It includes information on the sources of the water, any detected contaminants in the water, the maximum contaminants levels set by regulation, violations and actions taken to correct them, and opportunities for public participation in decisions that may affect the quality of the water provided.
California Government Code
Relevant sections of the California Government Code are identified below.
SECTION 65302
Revised safety elements must include maps of any 200-year flood plains and levee protection zones within the Planning Area.
SECTION 65584.04
Any land having inadequate flood protection, as determined by FEMA or DWR, must be excluded from land identified as suitable for urban development within the planning area.
SECTION 8589.4
California Government Code §8589.4, commonly referred to as the Potential Flooding-Dam Inundation Act, requires owners of dams to prepare maps showing potential inundation areas in the event of dam failure. A dam failure inundation zone is different from a flood hazard zone under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). NFIP flood zones are areas along streams or coasts where storm flooding is possible from a “100-year flood.” In contrast, a dam failure inundation zone is the area downstream from a dam that could be flooded in the event of dam failure due to an earthquake or other catastrophe. Dam failure inundation maps are reviewed and approved by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Sellers of real estate within inundation zones are required to disclose this information to prospective buyers.
California Department of Health Services
The Department of Health Services, Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management, oversees the Drinking Water Program. The Drinking Water Program regulates public water systems and certifies drinking water treatment and distribution operators. It provides support for small water systems and for improving their technical, managerial, and financial capacity. It provides subsidized funding for water system improvements under the State Revolving Fund (“SRF”) and Proposition 50 programs. The Drinking Water Program also oversees water recycling projects, permits water treatment devices, supports and promotes water system security, and oversees the Drinking Water Treatment and Research Fund for MTBE and other oxygenates. 580
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-15 Consumer Confidence Report Requirements
The preparation of Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) is required by Health & Safety Code §116470 and California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 20. Health & Safety Code §116470(b) also requires public water systems with more than 10,000 service connections that detect contaminants above their public health goals (PHGs) to provide PHG exceedance reports every three years and to hold public hearings regarding their reports.
California Water Code
California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Division 7 of the California Water Code) (Porter-Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and each of the RWQCBs power to protect water quality and is the primary vehicle for implementation of California’s responsibilities under the Federal CWA. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and the RWQCBs authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges to surface and groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites, and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, or oil or petroleum product.
Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for its region. The regional plans are to conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and established by the SWRCB in its State water policy. The Porter-Cologne Act also provides that a RWQCB may include within its regional plan water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste.
Assembly Bill 162
Assembly Bill (AB) 162 requires a general plan’s land use element to identify and annually review those areas covered by the general plan that are subject to flooding as identified by flood plain mapping prepared by FEMA or DWR. The bill also requires, upon the next revision of the housing element, on or after January 1, 2009, the conservation element of the general plan to identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitat, and land that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater recharge and stormwater management. By imposing new duties on local public officials, the bill creates a State-mandated local program.
This bill also requires, upon the next revision of the housing element, on or after January 1, 2009, the safety element to identify, among other things, information regarding flood hazards and to establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives, based on specified information for the protection of the community from, among other things, the unreasonable risks of flooding.
Assembly Bill 70
AB 70 provides that a city or county may be required to contribute its fair and reasonable share of the property damage caused by a flood to the extent that it has increased the State’s exposure to liability for property damage by unreasonably approving, as defined, new development in a 581
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North previously undeveloped area, as defined, that is protected by a State flood control project, unless the city or county meets specified requirements.
Senate Bill 610 and Assembly Bill 901
The State Legislature passed SB 610 and AB 901 in 2001. Both measures modified the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
SB 610 requires additional information in an urban water management plan if groundwater is identified as a source of water available to an urban water supplier. It also requires that the plan include a description of all water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken to meet total projected water use. SB 610 requires a city or county that determines a project is subject to CEQA to identify any public water system that may supply water to the project and to request identified public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. The assessment must include, among other information, an identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed Project, and water received in prior years pursuant to these entitlements, rights, and contracts.
AB 901 requires an urban water management plan to include information, to the extent practicable, relating to the quality of existing sources of water available to an urban water supplier over given time periods. AB 901 also requires information on the manner in which water quality affects water management strategies and supply reliability. The bill requires a plan to describe plans to supplement a water source that may not be available at a consistent level of use, to the extent practicable. Additional findings and declarations relating to water quality are required.
Senate Bill 221
SB 221 adds Government Code Section 66455.3, requiring that the local water agency be sent a copy of any proposed residential subdivision of more than 500 dwelling units within five days of the subdivision application being accepted as complete for processing by the city or county. It also adds Government Code Section 66473.7, establishing detailed requirements for establishing whether a “sufficient water supply” exists to support any proposed residential subdivisions of more than 500 dwellings, including any such subdivision involving a development agreement. When approving a qualifying subdivision tentative map, the city or county must include a condition requiring availability of a sufficient water supply. The applicable public water system must provide proof of availability. If there is no public water system, the city or county must undertake the analysis described in Government Code Section 66473.7. The analysis must include consideration of effects on other users of water and groundwater.
200-Year Flood Protection in the Central Valley
Both State policy and recently enacted State legislation (Senate Bill 5) call for 200-year (0.5% annual chance) flood protection to be the minimum level of protection for urban and urbanizing areas in the Central Valley. Senate Bill 5 (SB5) requires that the 200-year protection be consistent with criteria used or developed by the Department of Water Resources. SB 5 requires all urban and urbanizing areas in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys to achieve 200-year flood protection in 582
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-17 order to approve development. The new law restricts approval of development after 2016 if “adequate progress” towards achieving this standard is not met. Urban and urbanizing areas protected by State-Federal project levees cannot use “adequate progress” as a condition to approve development after 2028. Adequate progress is defined as meeting all of the following:
1. The project scope, cost and schedule have been developed;
2. In any given year, at least 90% of the revenues scheduled for that year have been appropriated and expended consistent with the schedule;
3. Construction of critical features is progressing as indicated by the actual expenditure of budget funds;
4. The city or county has not been responsible for any significant delay in completion of the system; and
5. The above information has been provided to the DWR and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board and the local flood management agency shall annually report on the efforts to complete the project.
State Updated Model Landscape Ordinance
Under AB 1881, the updated Model Landscape Ordinance requires cities and counties to adopt landscape water conservation ordinances by January 31, 2010 or to adopt a different ordinance that is at least as effective in conserving water as the updated Model Ordinance. Clovis Development Code Chapter 9.28 includes landscaping water use standards. Clovis Development Code Chapter
6.5, Article 5 includes the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Requirements that were modeled after the State’s Model Ordinance.
NPDES Construction General Permit
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 risk-based 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 583
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North California mandates requirements for all construction activities disturbing more than one acre of land to develop and implement SWPPPs. The SWPPP documents the selection and implementation of 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.
Water Quality Control Basin Plan
The Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan), amended by the CVRWQCB in 2018, 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.
State Water Resources Control Board Storm Water Strategy The Storm Water Strategy is founded on the results of the Storm Water Strategic Initiative, which served to direct the State Water Board’s role in storm water resources management and evolve the Storm Water Program by a) developing guiding principles to serve as the foundation of the storm water program, b) identifying issues that support or inhibit the program from aligning with the guiding principles, and c) proposing and prioritizing projects that the Water Boards could implement to address those issues.
The State Water Board staff created a strategy-based document called the Strategy to Optimize Management of Storm Water (STORMS). STORMS includes a program vision, missions, goals, objectives, projects, timelines, and consideration of the most effective integration of project outcomes into the Water Board’s Storm Water Program.
REGIONAL AND LOCAL
Fresno-Clovis Storm Water Quality Management Program
The Storm Water Quality Management Program (SWQMP) was developed pursuant to Order No.
R5-2013-0080, issued by the Central Valley RWQCB in 2013. The municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit (MS4 Permit) was issued to the FMFCD, the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, the County of Fresno, and the California State University at Fresno by the Central Valley RWQCB on May 31, 2013. The SWQMP includes specific pollution prevention and control practices for Fresno-Clovis urban drainage system planning, design, construction, and maintenance. It also includes public education to prevent stormwater pollution; specifies construction, industrial/commercial, municipal, and new development stormwater quality control practices; procedures to prevent and respond to illicit discharges and connections; monitoring to 584
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-19 assess municipal stormwater impacts on receiving waters; and program effectiveness assessments (PEA) to evaluate the effectiveness of best management practices (BMPs).
The SWQMP “control measures” refer to activities intended to minimize, reduce, eliminate, or prohibit the discharge of pollutants with the goal of improving water quality. The benefits of these control measures are assessed through evaluation of associated performance standards. The performance standards include schedules and milestones for implementation.
City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan includes several policies relevant to hydrology and water quality.
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 1.1: Flood Zone - Prohibit development within the 100-year flood zone and dam inundation areas unless adequate mitigation is provided against flood hazards. Participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.
OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT
• Goal 3: A built environment that conserves and protects the use and quality of water and energy resources.
• Policy 3.1: Stormwater management. Encourage the use of low impact development techniques that retain or mimic natural features for stormwater management. • Policy 3.2: Stormwater pollution. Minimize the use of non-point source pollutants and stormwater runoff.
City of Clovis Municipal Code
The City of Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 6.7 establishes the City’s Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The purpose of the ordinance is to protect and enhance the water quality of watercourses and water bodies by reducing pollutants in urban storm water discharges to the maximum extent practicable and by effectively prohibiting non-storm water discharges to the storm drain system. The ordinance prohibits any discharge that could result in or contribute to a violation of the municipal NPDES storm water discharge permit. It requires Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control the volume, rate, and potential pollutant load of storm water runoff from new development and redevelopment projects.
Chapter 8.7 requires payment of local drainage fees to fund construction of local drainage facilities and improvements.
Chapter 8.12 provides for floodplain management and regulates development in floodplains. A development permit must be obtained before construction or development within any area of special flood hazard. Permits require provisions for flood hazard reduction, including anchoring, flood-resistant materials, and construction methods to floodproof the structure. 585
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 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.
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.
3.9.3 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 hydrology and water quality if it will:
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality;
• Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin;
• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
o Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; o Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
o Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
o Impede or redirect flood flows.
• In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation; and/or
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Impact 3.9-1: The proposed Project has the potential to violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. (Less than Significant)
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
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 586
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-21 meet water quality standards. Over land or via storm sewer systems, polluted runoff is discharged, often untreated, directly into local water bodies. Soil erosion is one of the most common sources of polluted stormwater runoff during construction activities. When left uncontrolled, storm water 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 storm water 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:
“Sediment control BMPs should be the secondary means of preventing storm water 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 587
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North quality is protected. Frequent inspections coupled with thorough documentation and timely repair is necessary to ensure that all measures are functioning as intended…” Grading, excavation, removal of vegetation cover, and loading activities associated with construction activities could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Construction activities could also result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that could adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at construction sites and staging areas. 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 RWQCB 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.
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 the 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 would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
OPERATIONAL PHASE
The long-term operations of the proposed Project could result in long-term impacts to surface water quality from urban stormwater runoff. The proposed Project would result in new impervious areas associated with roadways, driveways, and residential structures. Normal activities in residentially developed areas include the use of various automotive petroleum products (i.e., oil, grease, and fuel), common household hazardous materials, heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and sediment. Within urban areas, these pollutants are generally called non-point source pollutants. The pollutant levels vary based on factors, such as time between storm events, volume of storm event, type of uses, and density of people.
Stormwater runoff in the City of Clovis is conveyed through a system of street gutters, underground storm drains, retention/detention basins, pumping stations, and open channels that are maintained by the FMFCD. FMFCD’s stormwater drainage system discharges to irrigation canals, creeks, and the San Joaquin River. The system is designed to accept the peak flow rate of runoff from a two-year 588
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-23 intensity storm event (a storm that has a 50 percent probability of occurring in any given year) (FMFCD, 2022b). When storm events occur that exceed the two-year intensity, ponding begins to occur in the streets until the pipeline system can remove the water. If the storm is of sufficient intensity to generate more water than the street can store, the water will continue to rise until it reaches a topographic outlet where it can escape down gradient.
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 Clovis regulations, 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 facilities.
Additionally, there are various non-structural and structural stormwater BMPs that can be implemented to reduce water pollution. Non-structural BMPs are typically aimed at prevention of pollution through public education and outreach. Non-structural BMPs include: school educational programs, newsletters, website information, commercial, billboards/advertisements, river cleanups, and storm drain stenciling. Structural BMPS are aimed at the physical collection, filtering, and detaining of stormwater. Structural BMPs include items such as drop inlet filters, vault filters, hydrodynamic separators, surface detention basins, and underground detention facilities.
The following are standards rules implemented in the form of BMPs to reduce the amount of pollution in stormwater discharged from the Project site. • Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping
o Prior to clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling, or excavation in each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall develop a spill response and prevention plan as a component of (1) SWPPPs prepared for construction activities, (2) SWPPPs for facilities subject to the NPDES Stormwater Permit, and (3) spill prevention control and countermeasure plans for qualifying facilities. The spill response and prevention plan shall be implemented during all construction activities.
o Streets and parking lots in all non-residential portions, including the right-of-way, of the Project site shall be swept at least once every two weeks. • Extended Detention Facilities: Extended detention refers to the facilities proposed for the Project site that would detain and temporarily store stormwater runoff to reduce the peak rates of discharge to the storm drainage system. Detention of stormwater allows particles and other pollutants to settle and thereby potentially reduce concentrations and mass loading of contaminants in the discharge.
• Grassed Swales: A swale is a vegetated, open channel management practice designed to treat and attenuate stormwater runoff for a specified water quality volume. Stormwater 589
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North runoff flowing through these channels is treated by being filtered through vegetation in the channel, through a subsoil matrix, and/or through infiltration into the underlying soils.
Swales can be used throughout the proposed Project area where feasible in the landscape design to treat street right-of-way parking runoff.
• Proprietary Devices: There are a variety of commercially available stormwater treatment devices designed to remove contaminants from drainage once flows enter the conveyance systems. StormFilter™ units, or equivalent filtration-type systems, and Bioswales are recommended for streets and parking areas. Drop inlet filters should also be used to control drainage runoff water quality.
BMPs will be implemented through the SWPPP program, and compliance with existing standards and rules, including the implementation of BMPs, would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.9-2: The proposed Project has the potential to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. (Less than Significant)
Infiltration/Natural Recharge: The proposed Project would result in new impervious surfaces and could reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge. Infiltration rates vary depending on the overlying soil types. In general, sandy soils have higher infiltration rates and can contribute to significant amounts of ground water recharge; clay soils tend to have lower percolation potential; and impervious surfaces such as pavement, significantly reduce infiltration capacity and increase surface water runoff.
Table 3.9-2 identifies the soils in the Project site and the soils infiltration rate.
TABLE 3.9-2: SOILS HYDROLOGIC RATING
NAME
% OF DEVELOPMENT
AREA
% OF NONDEVELOPMENT AREAHYDROLOGIC
RATING
An - Alamo clay 0.0% 0.3% D
ArA - Atwater sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent
slopes
13.8% 21.1% A
Gf - Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1
percent slopes, MLRA 17
29.4% 11.1% A/D
Gg - Grangeville fine sandy loam, saline
alkali
4.3% 0.1% B
Re - Ramona loam, hard substratum 26.0% 40.3% C
Rh - Riverwash 1.0% 0.1% N/A
SeA - San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3 percent
slopes
14.7% 16.5% C
TzbA - Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 3
percent slopes
0.0% 2.4% A
VaA - Visalia sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent
slopes
10.7% 8.1% A
SOURCE: NCRS 2022
590
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-25 The soils contained on the Project site have a hydrologic rating ranging from “A,” which is indicative of soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet, to “D,” which is indicative of soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet.
Figure 3.2-2 identifies Project site soils.
The infiltration rate of the soils on the Project site ranges from low to high. As indicated in the Geotechnical Report (Krazan & Associates, 2019), cemented silty sand and silty sand with trace clay, locally referred to as "hardpan," were encountered in several of the borings at the Project site. This cementation inhibits infiltration ofsurface water into the soil stratum below the hardpan. Therefore, it can be presumed that the Project site generally does not allow for a high level of groundwater recharge in its existing condition. Development of the Project site with impervious surfaces is unlikely to reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge when compared to existing conditions. The open space areas of the development totaling approximately 5.54 acres will remain largely pervious. The collection of rainwater for those areas of impervious surfaces will be routed into the proposed Project’s storm drainage system and eventually flow into the San Joaquin River.
The Project site is located in the Kings Groundwater Subbasin. As previously stated, the Kings Subbasin is recharged by water from sources including streams, percolation of rainfall and irrigation water, inflow from other groundwater basins, and intentional recharge at numerous facilities.
Intentional recharge is conducted in recharge ponds and on some farm fields with compensation to landowners. The hardpan encountered on the Project site generally does not allow for a high infiltration rate. While the proposed Project would result in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces within the Project site when compared to existing conditions, it is not anticipated that the proposed development would interfere with groundwater recharge, as much of the groundwater recharge in the basin occurs in the sand and gravels along the San Joaquin River from Sierra Nevada snowmelt flowing downstream.
Groundwater Extraction: Since the 2015 UWMP, SGMA has become effective and the City is working collaboratively with other agencies reliant on the groundwater basin to reach sustainable management of the groundwater aquifer prior to 2040, as required. The supply from groundwater sources has been modified to reflect this change in the City’s supply portfolio. In the 2010 and 2015 UWMPs, the City’s groundwater supplies were shown to be increasing with population growth into the future. The historical volume of groundwater pumped by the City from 2016 to 2020 ranged from 10,956 in 2019 to as high as 13,187 in 2016. In 2020, the City extracted 12,105 AF and conducted 5,316 AF of intentional recharge activities, which put the net extraction below the sustainable yield. It is presently understood that 9,400 AF per year can be sustainably used from the aquifer. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B). The City’s 30-year average groundwater recharge quantity is approximately 8,412 AFY. The projected groundwater supply in the 2020 UWMP shows it decreasing to the estimated sustainable amount of 9,400 AFY. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B). The overall water supply is met with an increase in surface and recycled water sources to offset the reduced use of groundwater resources.
The City has been searching for additional land to construct another dedicated groundwater recharge facility in the City. The facility will likely be in North Clovis upgradient of City wells. A minimum of 20 to 40 acres is desired with a minimum recharge capability of 1,500 to 3,000 AF per 591
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North year. An additional project that the City is pursuing in cooperation with FID, FMFCD, and the City of Fresno, is either reoperation of Big Dry Detention Basin, known as the Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project, to allow storage of East Side Stream Flood releases or a project to increase recharge capabilities upstream of the Basin. This is currently in the study phase. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
In addition, there are two banking facilities, the Waldron Banking Facilities (WBF) and Boswell Groundwater Banking Facility (BGBF), have been constructed in central Fresno County. The City entered into an agreement with the FID to participate in the financing of the construction of a dedicated water banking facility called the Waldron Banking Facilities. The City is entitled to receive up to ninety percent (9,000 AF) of the annual yield. The City plans on taking the water in dry years to augment supply. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
The groundwater supplies the City relies upon are not in the process of adjudication. The surface water supplies have either long-range contracts or newly executed contracts to document quantities and availability to the City. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Recycled water is considered a consistent source; however, because it is mainly dependent upon indoor residential use, it is susceptible to water rationing. In 2020, the City utilized approximately 28 percent of its treated wastewater, an increase over past years; however, the use primarily was limited by its existing infrastructure and seasonal need. The amount of recycled water the City intends to use for beneficial purposes is expected to increase as additional infrastructure is built, wastewater generation increases, and the Clovis Water Reuse Plant expands. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Groundwater supply projections include approved developments outside of the City boundaries, but within the planning area and estimated groundwater pumping by others within the planning area.
The projected groundwater supply reliability does not account for groundwater pumping outside the City’s planning area, nor undocumented privately owned domestic or irrigation wells.
Groundwater use may increase as population increases and groundwater use by others (including school districts and agricultural users) may also increase in single dry years and multiple dry years (when surface water cutbacks occur).
The ’sustainable yield’ is defined as the amount of groundwater pumping that can occur while maintaining groundwater at sustainable levels and avoiding undesirable results. The sustainable yield can be estimated as the total groundwater recharge (from natural and artificial sources) minus the groundwater outflow (as shown below). The GSP of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency indicates that the sustainable yield of the groundwater basin is approximately 1,140,000 AFY/acre (1,360,000 AF -220,000 AF).
CONCLUSION
A full water supply assessment is provided in Section 3.14 Utilities. The technical analyses shows that the total projected water supplies determined to be available for the proposed Project during Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. The 592
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-27 water supply for the City as a whole is shifting more toward surface water supplies since 2015 and will continue on that path through 2040 to ensure compliance with the Kings sub basin groundwater sustainability plan (GSP).
For the reasons mentioned above, the proposed Project would not cause the substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. As such, implementation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
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. (Less than Significant) Currently, runoff from within the Project site is collected in a system of shallow agricultural and roadside ditches. Public storm drain facilities are not currently installed in the agricultural fields.
Planned urbanization of the Project site would result in changes to land use and infiltration characteristics and would introduce new sources of water pollutants, producing “urban runoff.” Pollutants contained within urban runoff may include, but are not limited to, sediment, oxygendemanding substances (e.g., organic matter), nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus), heavy metals, bacteria, oil and grease, and toxic chemicals that can degrade receiving waters. Urban runoff pollutants may stem from erosion of disturbed areas, deposition of atmospheric particles derived from automobile or industrial sources, corrosion or decay of building materials, rainfall contact with toxic substances, decomposing plant materials, animal excrement, and spills of toxic materials on surfaces, which receive rainfall and generate runoff. New residential uses within the Project site may also generate urban runoff from streets and driveways. Yard areas may produce fertilizer wastes and/or bacterial contamination from animal excrement.
Stormwater runoff in the City of Clovis is conveyed through a system of street gutters, underground storm drains, retention/detention basins, pumping stations, and open channels that are maintained by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD). The FMFCD operates under a Storm Water Quality Management Program, which is assessed on an annual basis to demonstrate compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) municipal stormwater permit (CA0085324) for the FMFCD. The FMFCD is the lead permit agency, and Co-Permittees are the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, the County of Fresno, and California State University, Fresno (CSUF).
The proposed stormwater collection system functions through storm drainage collection, treatment, and discharge. The exact sizing of the underground piping will be engineered during the preparation of the improvement plans, which will be in coordination with FMFCD. The proposed storm drainage collection and detention system will be subject to the State Water Resources Control Board Requirements (SWRCB) and City of Clovis regulations; Phase II, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Requirements; NPDES-MS4 Permit Requirements; and LID Guidelines.
593
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North FMFCD will require lot coverage to be provided prior to submittal of improvement plans. The lot coverage is calculated by the District to include the front yard walkway, sidewalk walkway and the rear yard patio equaling an additional 6% of impervious area in addition to the City’s typical lot coverage calculation. This calculation cannot be calculated at this time given that building plans and lot specific landscaping and site improvements have not been prepared. This very detailed level of design would be performed at either the improvement plan or building plan phase of the project.
Ultimately, FMFCD charges a drainage fee that is calculated commensurate with the lot coverage calculation.
FMFCD reviews all grading and improvement plans for consistency with the FMFCD Master Plan.
This review ensures that grading does not have an adverse impact to major storm conveyance and to the passage of storm water to the adjacent roadways and existing storm drainage pipelines and inlets. They require all projects to provide the appropriate surface flowage easements or covenants for any portion of the development area that cannot convey storm water to the public right-of-way without crossing private property.
The initial review by FMFCD has indicated that the “Development Area” is currently located within FMFCD’s adopted Rural Master Plan Drainage Area “BY1.” The adopted Rural Master Plan drainage system is designed to serve the existing land uses of open space, range/pasture and rural residential housing densities ranging from 0 to 0.7 dwelling unit/acre (du/ac). FMFCD has indicated that the existing planned drainage facilities do not have capacity to serve the proposed higher urban density residential land use. FMFCD has indicated that the “Development Area” is required to mitigate the impacts of the increased runoff from the proposed higher density residential land use to the adopted rural planned rate. FMFCD indicated that the “Development Area” may either make improvements to the existing pipeline system to provide additional capacity or may use some type of onsite permanent peak reducing facility in order to match the adopted Rural Master Plan flow rates and eliminate any adverse impacts on the downstream drainage system. FMFCD requested that the grading Engineer contact the District as early as possible to review the proposed site grading for verification and acceptance of design prior to preparing a grading plan.
FMFCD noted that the construction of the Optional Master Plan Facilities and Optional Non-Master Plan Facilities (as shown on Exhibit No. 1 of their letter), will provide permanent drainage service to the portion of the “Development Area” located north of Heirloom Avenue. The construction of the Optional Non-Master Plan Facilities, as shown on Exhibit No. 1, will provide permanent drainage service to the portion of the “Development Area” located south of Heirloom Avenue upon construction of facilities by in Tracts 6292 and 6344. If these optional facilities are not constructed, FMFCD recommends temporary facilities until permanent service is available.
FMFCD noted that the “Development Area” shall not block the historical drainage patterns of existing homes located within the parcels to the east and west side of the “Development Area.” The “Development Area” shall verify to the satisfaction of FMFCD that runoff from these areas has the ability to surface drain to adjacent streets or be collected into PER-3, as shown on Exhibit No. 1.
Either a stub street, channel, or a combination of both shall be provided for those areas, as shown on Exhibit No. 1.
594
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-29 FMFCD noted that the “Development Area” must identify what streets will pass the major storm and provide calculations that show structures will have adequate flood protection. Based on historical drainage patterns, some of the streets located within the “Development Area” may need to be resized or reconfigured (including, but not limited to, streets that include traffic calming curbs) to pass larger event storms. FMFCD approval is not extended to street configuration. A drainage report indicating the path of the major storm flow and calculations confirming there is adequate protection of finished floors will be necessary.
Stormwater quality standards imposed and monitored by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the SWRCB through the NPDES permit require treatment of stormwater runoff prior to its release into drainage features. Stormwater quality is an integral part of FMFCD’s stormwater management system. With the design and construction of flood control improvements included in the proposed storm drainage system in accordance with FMFCD’s requirements, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.9-4 The proposed Project has the potential to otherwise substantially degrade water quality. (Less than Significant) Water Quality Impacts from Discharges to 303(d) Listed Water Bodies: Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.
According to the California Water Quality Control Monitoring Council, which is part of California Environmental Protection Agency, Natural Resources, there are many areas within the San Joaquin County which are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. Those areas in the regional vicinity of the Project site that are impaired are referred as Delta Waterways (Southern Portion) by the Water Quality Control Monitoring Council. This includes 3,125 acres listed as early as 1996 for Chlorpyrifos (Agriculture, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers), DDT (Agriculture), Diazinon (Agriculture, Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers), Electrical Conductivity (Agriculture), Group A Pesticides (Agriculture), Invasive Species (Source Unknown), Mercury (Resource Extraction), and Unknown Toxicity (Source Unknown).
The San Joaquin River is specifically listed by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) as an impaired water body due to mercury under the Clean Water Act. Mercury is a sediment-based pollutant that can be released into the water column during various in-water construction activities (e.g., construction of the storm drain outfall) that may disturb the sediment and cause turbidity. As a result, such activities may increase the likelihood of mercury exposure to the public and wildlife that utilize the San Joaquin River.
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 595
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. 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 RWQCB 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 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.
The ongoing operational phase of the proposed Project (all phases) requires discharge of stormwater into the on-site detention basins, which would ultimately flow into FMFCD system. The discharge of stormwater must be treated through BMPs prior to its discharge. The standards and regulations contained above would ensure that BMPs are implemented to reduce the amount of pollution in stormwater discharged from the Project site into the FMFCD system. Storm water drainage is managed through the implementation of BMPs to the extent they are technologically achievable to prevent and reduce pollutants. The City requires reasonable protection from accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses. The management of water quality through BMPs is intended to ensure that water quality does not degrade to levels that would violate water quality standards.
The use of BMPs is intended to treat runoff close to the source during the construction and longterm operational phase of the Project to reduce stormwater quality impacts. The previously described control measures listed are existing regulatory requirements. Development of proposed Project in compliance with the regulatory control measure requirements, would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
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. (Less than Significant) As shown on Figure 3.9-2, the majority of the Project site is located within the 500-year flood zone, and the northern and northeastern portion of the Project site is within the 100-year flood zone. It is noted that a small portion in the north of the Development Area is within the 100-year flood zone.
The majority of the Development Area within the Project site is located in an area designated to have a minimal flood hazard. The flood zone designation of the site is also not due to a reduced risk from a levee nor is it located within a regulatory floodway.
Flooding events can result in damage to structures, injury or loss of human and animal life, exposure of waterborne diseases, and damage to infrastructure. In addition, standing floodwater can destroy agricultural crops, undermine infrastructure and structural foundations, and contaminate groundwater.
596
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.9-31 The portions of the Project site that lie within the 100-year flood zone would require a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) before development would be allowed. A LOMR is a document that officially revises a portion of the effective FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) according to requirements and procedures outlined in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations. A LOMR allows FEMA to revise flood hazard information on a FIRM map via letter without physically revising and reprinting the entire map panel. The LOMR will reflect changes in elevation from grading and no flood insurance requirements would be imposed on structures in these areas once the LOMR is approved by FEMA. The LOMR process is a standard requirement for all new construction or substantial improvements of structures to ensure that they are elevated to or above the base flood elevation. Through compliance with these existing regulations, impacts would be less than significant and no new structures would be constructed within the 100-year flood plain.
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. (Less than Significant)
A tsunami is a sea wave caused by a submarine earthquake, landslide, or volcanic eruption. A tsunami can cause catastrophic damage to shallow or exposed shorelines. The Project site is approximately 117 miles from the coastline of the Pacific Ocean, which is sufficiently distant to preclude effects from a tsunami.
Seiches are changes or oscillations of water levels within a confined water body. Seiches are caused by fluctuation in the atmosphere, tidal currents or earthquakes. The effect of this phenomenon is a standing wave that would occur when influenced by the external causes. The Project site is not adjacent to any lakes that pose a significant risk from a seiche event.
A mudflow is a type of mass wasting or landslide, where earth and surface materials are rapidly transported downhill under the force of gravity. Mudflow events are caused by a combination of factors, including soil type, soil profile, precipitation, and slope. Mudflow may be triggered by heavy rainfall that the soil is not able to sufficiently drain or absorb. As a result of this super-saturation, soil and rock materials become unstable and eventually slide away from their existing location. Soils most susceptible to mudflow are saturated, loose, non-plastic, uniformly graded, and fine-grained sand deposits. The Project site is relatively flat making the potential of mudflows low.
The Project site is subject to flood inundation as a result of dam failure. Figure 3.9-3 shows areas that are susceptible to dam inundation. Dam failure is generally a result of structural instability caused by improper design or construction, instability resulting from seismic shaking, or overtopping and erosion of the dam. As discussed previously, larger dams that are higher than 25 feet or with storage capacities over 50 acre-feet of water are regulated by the California Dam Safety Act, which is implemented by the California Department of Water Resources, DSD. DSD is responsible for inspecting and monitoring these dams. The Act also requires that dam owners submit to the California Office of Emergency Services inundation maps for dams that would cause significant loss of life or personal injury as a result of dam failure. The County Office of Emergency Services is 597
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North responsible for developing and implementing a Dam Failure Plan that designates evacuation plans, the direction of floodwaters, and provides emergency information.
Regular inspection by DSD and maintenance by the dam owners ensure that the dams are kept in safe operating conditions. As such, failure of these dams is considered to have an extremely low probability of occurring and is not considered to be a reasonably foreseeable event.
The proposed Project is not anticipated to result in the exposure of 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. This impact is considered less than significant. 598
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
Dry Creek
Dry Creek
Dry Creek
Clovis Ditch
Enterprise Canal
Enterprise Canal
Enterprise Canal
Helm Colonial Ditch
West Branch Clovis Ditch
Helm Colonial Ditch
UV168
UV168
UV168
PEACH AVE
SHEPHERD AVE
FOWLER AVE
NEES AVE
ARMSTRONG AVE
T
EMPE
RANCE
AVE
CLOVIS AVE
BULLARD AVE
SIERRA AVE
ALLUVIAL AVE
LOCAN AVE
HERNDON AVE
TEAGUE AVE
MINNEWAWA AVE
DUKE AVE
FIFTH ST
CINDY AVE
TOLLHOUSE RD
VILLA AVE
SPRUCE AVE SUNNYSIDE AVE
HELM AVE
±
0 1,200600
Feet
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits
Waterways
Perennial Stream
Pipeline, Connector, or Artificial Path
Canal or Ditch
Watersheds
Dog Creek-Fish Slough
Dry Creek
James Bypass
Figure 3.9-1 Watershed
Sources: Fresno County GIS; USGS; NHD; WBD. Map date: May 8, 2023.
SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
599
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
600
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
UV168
UV168
UV168
PEACH AVE
SHEPHERD AVE
FOWLER AVE
NEES AVE
ARMSTRONG AVE
TEMPERANCE
AVE
CLOVIS AVE
BULLARD AVE
SIERRA AVE
ALLUVIAL AVE
LOCAN AVE
HERNDON AVE
TEAGUEAVE
MINNEWAWA AVE
DUKE AVE
FIFTH ST
CINDY AVE
TOLLHOUSE RD
VILLA AVE
SPRUCE AVE
SUNNYSIDE AVE
HELM AVE
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits
FEMA Designation
100-Year Flood Zone
500-Year Flood Zone
Regulatory Floodway
Area of Minimal Flood
Hazard
Area with Reduced Flood
Risk due to Levee
Figure 3.9-2 FEMA Flood Zones
Sources: Fresno County GIS; FEMA. Map date: May 8, 2023. ±
0 1,200600
Feet
SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
601
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
602
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
UV168
UV168
UV168
PEACH AVE
SHEPHERD AVE
FOWLER AVE
NEES AVE
ARMSTRONG AVE
TEMPERANCE
AVE
CLOVIS AVE
BULLARD AVE
SIERRA AVE
ALLUVIAL AVE
LOCAN AVE
HERNDON AVE
TEAGUEAVE
MINNEWAWA AVE
DUKE AVE
FIFTH ST
CINDY AVE
TOLLHOUSE RD
VILLA AVE
SPRUCE AVE
SUNNYSIDE AVE
HELM AVE
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Clovis City Limits
Alluvial Drain Detention Dam Inundation Area
Big Dry Creek Dam Inundation Area
Figure 3.9-3 Dam Inundation
Sources: Fresno County GIS; DWR. Map date: May 8, 2023. ±
0 1,200600
Feet
SHEPHERD NORTH PROJECT
603
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
604
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-1 This section describes the existing land uses on the Project site and in the surrounding area, describes the applicable land use regulations, and evaluates the environmental effects of implementation of the proposed Project related to land use, population, and housing. Information in this section is based on information provided in the proposed Project materials and the following reference documents:
• 2014 Clovis General Plan (City of Clovis, 2014);
• 2014 Clovis General Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (City of Clovis, 2014); • 2000 Fresno County General Plan (City of Clovis, 2000); • 2018 Fresno County Zoning Ordinance (City of Clovis, 2018); • City of Clovis Municipal Code, Title 9 – Development Code (City of Clovis, 2022). • A Landscape of Choice: Strategies for Improving Patterns of Community Growth (The Growth Alternatives Alliance, April 1998)
There were no comments received during the public review period or scoping meetings for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic.
3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
EXISTING PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The Clovis 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.
The City of Clovis is in the central portion of Fresno County, approximately 6.5 miles northeast of the City of Fresno downtown area. The City is surrounded by portions of unincorporated Fresno County to the north, east, and south and by the City of Fresno to the west and southwest. At the local level, the Plan Area is generally bounded by Copper Avenue on the north, Willow Avenue on the west, Academy Avenue on the east, and Shields Avenue on the south. State Route 168 (SR-168) bisects the City from the southwest to the northeast.
Project 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 Expansion, General Plan Amendment, Pre-zone, Annexation, Tentative Tract Map, and Residential Site Plan Review.
605
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-2 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 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 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 shows aerial imagery of the existing site uses within the Project site.
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, 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.
606
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-3
DEMOGRAPHICS
Population Trends
The City experienced a population increase from 2000 to 2010 of 27,163 persons (39.7%) as shown in Table 3.10-1. During the period from 2010 to 2022, population continued to increase in the City, resulting in a total population of 123,665 in 2022.
TABLE 3.10-1: POPULATION GROWTH
YEAR POPULATION CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE
2000 68,468 -- --
2010 95,631 27,163 39.7%
2020 123,665 28,034 29.3%
SOURCES: CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN EIR, TABLE 5.13-1; CA DOF, 2020.
Housing Stock
Table 3.10-2 summarizes the growth of the City’s housing stock between 2000 and 2022. The number of housing units increased from 25,265 in 2000 to 35,226 in 2010. This represents 39.4 percent growth in the City’s housing stock. The City’s housing stock totaled 45,835 units in 2022.
TABLE 3.10-2: HOUSING UNIT GROWTH
YEAR HOUSING UNITS CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE
2000 25,265 -- --
2010 35,226 9,961 39.4%
2020 45,835 10,609 30.1%
SOURCES: CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN EIR, TABLE 5.13-2; CA DOF, 2020.
Persons Per Dwelling Unit
According to the most recent Department of Finance (2022) estimate, the average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit in the City of Clovis is 2.81.
3.10.2 REGULATORY SETTING
STATE
Government Code
California Government Code Section 65300 et seq. establishes the obligation of cities and counties to adopt and implement general plans. The general plan is a comprehensive, long-term, and general document that describes plans for the physical development of a jurisdiction and of any land outside its boundaries that, in the jurisdiction’s judgment, bears relation to its planning. The general plan addresses a broad range of topics, including, at a minimum, land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. In addressing these topics, the general plan identifies the goals, objectives, policies, principles, standards, and plan proposals that support the jurisdiction’s vision for the area. The general plan is a long-range document that typically addresses the physical character of an area over a 20-year period. Although the general plan serves as a 607
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North blueprint for future development and identifies the overall vision for the planning area, it remains general enough to allow for flexibility in the approach taken to achieve the plan's goals.
The State Zoning Law (California Government Code Section 65800 et seq.) establishes that zoning ordinances, which are laws that define allowable land uses within a specific district, are required to be consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plans. When amendments to the general plan are made, corresponding changes in the zoning ordinance may be required within a reasonable time to ensure the land uses designated in the general plan would also be allowable by the zoning ordinance (Government Code, Section 65860, subd. [c]).
State of California Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act establishes procedures for local government changes of organization, including city incorporations, annexations to a city or special district, and city and special district consolidations. In approving an annexation, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) will consider the following factors:
• Population and population density; land area and land use; per capita assessed valuation; topography, natural boundaries, and drainage basins; proximity to other populated areas; and the likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and unincorporated areas during the next ten years.
• The need for organized community services; the present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in the area; probable future needs for those services and controls; and the probable effect of the proposed incorporation, formation, annexation, exclusion and of alternative courses of action on the cost and adequacy of services and controls in the area and adjacent areas.
• The effect of the proposed action and of alternative actions on adjacent areas, on mutual social and economic interests, and on the local government structure of the county. • The conformity of both the proposal and its anticipated effects with both the adopted commission policies on providing planned, orderly, and efficient patterns of urban development, and the policies and priorities set forth in Government Code section 56377. • The effect of the proposal on maintaining the physical and economic integrity of agricultural lands, as defined by Government Code section 56016.
• The definiteness and certainty of the boundaries of the territory, nonconformance of proposed boundaries with lines of assessment or ownership, creation of islands or corridors of unincorporated territory, and other similar matters affecting the proposed boundaries. • Consistency with city or county general and specific plans. • The sphere of influence of any local agency that may be applicable to the proposal being reviewed.
• The comments of any affected local agency.
• The ability of the newly formed or receiving entity to provide the services that are the subject of the application to the area, including the sufficiency of revenues for those services following the proposed boundary change.
608
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-5 • Timely availability of water supplies adequate for projected needs as specified in Government Code section 65352.5.
• The extent to which the proposal will affect a city or cities and the county in achieving their respective fair shares of the regional housing needs, as determined by the appropriate council of governments consistent with Housing Element laws. • Any information or comments from lawmakers.
• Any information relating to existing land use designations.
In addition to the above factors, LAFCo may also consider any resolution raising objections to the action that may be filed by an affected agency; and any other matters which the commission deems material.
Senate Bill 330
Senate Bill 330 “The Housing Crisis Act of 2019” is a statewide bill intended to reduce the time it takes to approve housing developments in California. SB 330 would declare a statewide housing emergency to be in effect until January 1, 2030. During that period, cities and counties found to have high rents and low rental vacancy rates would:
• Be prohibited from reducing housing densities, increasing development fees, or taking a range of other actions affecting housing development (both for-sale and rental); • Have any such actions taken since January 1, 2018 declared null and void; • Be prohibited from imposing fees on new units that are deed restricted for families earning less than 80% of the area median income;
• Be prohibited from enforcing requirements that new developments include parking; • Be required to process housing development applications under the general plan and zoning ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete.
Other provisions of SB 330 would apply to all jurisdictions not only those with high rents and low vacancy rates. These include requiring cities and counties to process housing development applications under the general plan and zoning ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete, a ban on holding more than three de novo public hearings on a project, and a requirement that cities and counties post all development standards online. The bill would also call for the State Department of Housing and Community Development to update building standards for “occupied substandard buildings.”
LOCAL
Fresno Council of Governments
The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) is an association of local governments from cities within Fresno County. The member agencies include City of Clovis, City of Coalinga, City of Firebaugh, City of Fowler, City of Fresno, City of Huron, City of Kerman, City of Kingsburg, City of Mendota, City of Orange Cove, City of Parlier, City of Reedley and City of San Joaquin, City of Sanger, City of Selma, and County of Fresno. FCOG is responsible for the preparation of, and updates to, the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) for the region. The RTP/SCS 609
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North provides a 25-year transportation vision and strategies for air emissions reduction. The 2018 MTP/SCS was adopted by the FCOG board in July 2017.
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY The 2018 RTP is a long-range plan for transportation improvements in the region. The RTP identifies existing and future transportation related needs, while considering all modes of travel, analyzing alternative solutions, and identifying anticipated available funding for the over 3,000 projects and multiple programs. The plan is based on projections for growth in population, housing, and jobs.
FCOG determines the regional growth projections by evaluating baseline data (existing housing units and employees, jobs/housing ratio, and percent of regional growth share for housing units and employees), historic reference data (based upon five- and ten-year residential building permit averages and historic county-level employment statistics), capacity data (General Plan data for each jurisdiction), and current RTP data about assumptions used in the most recent RTP/SCS. FCOG staff then meets with each jurisdiction to discuss and incorporate more subjective considerations about planned growth for each area. Finally, FCOG makes a regional growth forecast for new homes and new jobs, based upon an economic analysis provided by a recognized expert in order to estimate regional growth potential based on market analysis and related economic data. This growth forecast is then incorporated into the RTP/SCS.
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS PLAN
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate a fair share of the regional housing need. The share is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). FCOG is the lead agency for developing the RHNA that includes Fresno County and the City of Clovis. If a jurisdiction failed to make adequate sites available to accommodate the RHNA in the previous planning period, AB 1233 (Government Code Section 65584.09) requires the jurisdiction to identify and, if necessary, rezone sites in the first year of the current planning period to address the unaccommodated lower-income RHNA from the previous planning period. This requirement is in addition to the requirement to identify other specific sites to accommodate the RHNA for the current planning period. The City may not count capacity on the same sites for both planning periods.
Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission
The Fresno LAFCo is responsible for coordinating orderly reorganization to local jurisdictional boundaries, including annexations. Any annexation of the Project site to the City is subject to LAFCo approval, and LAFCo will review proposed annexations for consistency with LAFCo’s Annexation Policies and Procedures.
Fresno LAFCo has adopted Policies and Procedures for Annexation and Detachment to and from all agencies within their jurisdiction. It is Fresno LAFCo policy (102-01) that “within the sphere of influence each agency should implement an orderly, phased annexation program. A proposal should not be approved solely because the area falls within the sphere of influence of an agency.” The City of Clovis follows the Policies and Procedures for Annexation and Detachment when annexing land into the City. LAFCo recommends that each local agency fulfill this policy through the exercise of one or more of the following basic principles and actions:
610
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-7
1. The annexation program is consistent with LAFCo’s Sphere of influence (SOI) for the City.
Suggested actions:
• City and county shall reach agreement on development standards and planning and zoning requirements within the sphere to ensure that development within the sphere occurs in a manner that reflects the concerns of the affected city and is accomplished in a manner that promotes the logical and orderly development of areas within the sphere. GC §56425 • City responds to a request to extend service outside of its city limits and SOIs in consultation with GC §56133 and Fresno LAFCo policy.
2. The annexation program clearly implements the city’s general plan.
Suggested actions:
• City annexation applications shall describe how the proposal implements the City’s general plan and support these statements with information from other official sources, such as the annual budget, capital improvement plan, and so forth.
• A prezoning ordinance shall not be encumbered with extraneous conditions that preclude the ordinance’s effective date by the time of LAFCo hearing on the annexation.
3. The annexation program emphasizes the use of cities’ resolution of application versus property owner/registered voter petitions.
Suggested action:
• For the City to consider opposing property owner petition-initiated reorganizations as these would not have proceeded through the process of City development review and approval, which is an important step in the management of a City’s general plan.
4. The annexation program supports orderly growth by identifying areas to be annexed, general time frames for growth, and a plan for extension of services to these areas.
Suggested actions:
• Capital improvement plan and/or facilities plans include all lands within the SOI; • Development impact fees that fund the extension of services are established and maintained;
• Impacts to service delivery are assessed in the City’s EIR or project-specific CEQA documents and appropriately-scaled mitigation is approved and implemented. • The City coordinates its public policy documents in support of the annexation program.
5. The annexation program anticipates changes of organization of existing service districts and service areas in the SOI or adjacent to the SOI.
Suggested action:
611
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • The Program should describe the transition of services that will occur when the City annexes/detaches (CID, NCFPD, FCFPD, KRCD, etc.); inversely, the document describes the status of or continuation of services when annexations do not result in detachment (FID, FMFCD, etc.).
6. The annexation program anticipates the location of Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within a City’s sphere of influence.
Suggested action:
• Cities should become proficient in implementing their responsibilities under Senate Bill 244, should review Fresno LAFCo DUC policy and review Senate Bill 244 Technical Advisory.
7. The annexation program informs citizens in annexation areas of their rights, benefits, and changes that will occur on annexation.
Suggested actions:
• City to establish and maintain on its website a description of the information above, how citizens can engage the process, how the City engages citizens and stakeholders and other information related to annexation. This information should include a description of the SOI, protest processes, and how LAFCo is involved.
• For those portions of a City’s SOI that contain a large number of rural residential parcels that are planned for urban uses, the City is strongly encouraged to develop a long-term plan to annex and serve these areas.
8. The annexation program will be coordinated with LAFCo’s Municipal Services Review (MSR) for the City.
Suggested action:
• City applications should include an assessment of current MSR determinations and recommendations.
9. The annexation program is managed by an assigned and responsible City staff member.
Suggested action:
• City identifies a staff member to serve as a genuine point of contact with LAFCo, that is, a staff member responsible and accountable for managing applications, knowledgeable of the project and of LAFCo’s process, and empowered to facilitate the City’s annexation program.
10. City entitlement analysis is integrated with LAFCo policies Suggested action:
• Local agencies, including Fresno County, are strongly advised to include Fresno LAFCo in their initial request for comments.
612
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-9 • When initial planning applications that will eventually require annexation are submitted to cities, they are encouraged to submit a pre-application to LAFCo, so that LAFCo can track the project at its beginning and provide comments that would facilitate annexation in time for these to be considered in a timely and efficient manner.
City of Clovis General Plan
As noted above, General Plans are prepared under a mandate from the State of California, which requires each city and county to prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its jurisdiction and any adjacent related lands. State law requires General Plans to address seven mandated components: circulation, conservation, housing, land use, noise, open space, and safety.
In addition to those components required by State law, the Clovis General Plan also contains optional elements, including Environmental Safety, Economic Development, Public Facilities and Services, and Air Quality.
GENERAL PLAN
The City of Clovis General Plan includes an introduction and eight separate chapters that establish goals and policies for each given set of topics. The chapters cover all of the topics required by California State Government Code Section 65302, as well as topics of particular interest to Clovis.
The General Plan structure is summarized as follows:
• Land Use Element: establishes the general distribution, location, and extent of future land uses and provides standards for the intensity and density of the built environment. It establishes policies to guide land use, development, and redevelopment. • Economic Development Element: links land use and development to economic growth, jobs and income, and municipal revenues and expenditures.
• Circulation Element: determines the transportation system necessary to accommodate the planned land use and development.
• Housing Element: serves as the City’s principal guide for housing programs and strategies to address housing needs. State law (Government Code Sections 65580-65589.8) requires that every City and County in California adopt a Housing Element as a part of its General Plan. The Housing Element must be updated every eight years and is subject to detailed statutory requirements and mandatory review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
• Public Facilities and Services Element: defines the nature and types of public facilities, services, and activities necessary to maintain a high quality of life in Clovis. • Environmental Safety Element: focuses the protection of the community from environmental and man-made hazards.
613
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Open Space and Conservation Element: seeks to protect and preserve open space, productive agricultural areas, and environmental resources. This element also establishes goals for the maintenance and provision of new and existing parks. • Air Quality Element: addresses the role of local land use planning in improving regional air quality.
General Plan Land Use Map
The General Plan Land Use Map portrays the ultimate uses of land in the City of Clovis through land use designations. The Land Use Map designates the Project site as Rural Residential (RR). Figure 2.0- 6 in Chapter 2.0 depicts the Clovis General Plan land use designations for the Project site and the surrounding areas.
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 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.
General Plan Policies
The following policies of the General Plan related to land use, population and housing are applicable to the proposed Project:
• Land Use Policy 3.5: Fiscal sustainability. The City shall require establishment of community facility districts, lighting and landscaping maintenance districts, special districts, and other special funding or financing tools in conjunction with or as a condition of development, building or permit approval, or annexation or sphere of influence amendments when necessary to ensure that new development is fiscally neutral or beneficial. • Land Use Policy 4.1: Clovis leadership. The city shall take a leadership role in the land use planning for the sphere of influence and entire Clovis General Plan Area. • Land Use 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.
• Housing Policy 1.1: Consistency analysis of the proposed project with the State Planning Law, California Complete Streets Act, and City of Clovis Development Code would be the same for both the 2035 scenario and full buildout.
• Housing Policy 1.2: Support mixed-use projects that promote and enhance the adopted goals and policies of the Clovis General Plan.
• Housing Policy 1.3: Encourage and participate in efforts designed to achieve economies and efficiencies that will facilitate the production of quality, affordable housing. 614
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-11 • Housing Policy 1.4: Promote balanced, orderly growth to minimize unnecessary development costs adding to the cost of housing.
• Housing Policy 2.3: Encourage a diversity of housing types in mixed-use areas, village centers, and other areas in the City to support the Clovis community values. • Housing Policy 4.3: Encourage development of sound new housing on vacant land within existing neighborhoods that have the necessary service infrastructure. • Housing Policy 4.4: Support and encourage all public and private efforts to rehabilitate and improve the existing stock, including use of federal, state, and local programs for this purpose.
• Housing Policy 4.5: Promote public awareness of the need for housing and neighborhood conservation.
• Housing Policy 4.9: Encourage available public and private housing rehabilitation assistance programs in neighborhoods where such action is needed to ensure preservation of the living environment.
• Housing Policy 4.10: Manage neighborhood environmental factors to focus on neighborhood preservation and stabilization.
• Economic Development Policy 1.2: Jobs-housing ratio. Improve the City’s job-housing ratio by promoting growth in jobs suited to the skills and education of current and future residents with the objective of the number of jobs in Clovis being equal to the number of employed residents.
City of Clovis Municipal Code, Title 9 – Development Code The City’s Development Code implements the policies of the Clovis General Plan and applicable specific plans by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City of Clovis.
This Development 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.
ZONING MAP
The Zoning Map identifies zoning districts within the City at the parcel level. The Zoning Map does not designate the Project site because the site is not located within the City limits.
County of Fresno General Plan
The Fresno County General Plan is a policy guide for physical and economic growth of the County.
Unincorporated land located within the Project site is currently under the jurisdiction of the County.
Figure 2.0-8 in Chapter 2.0 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. The Non-Development Area is designated as Rural Residential by the County’s General Plan Land Use Map. 615
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Fresno County Municipal Code, Division VI – Zoning Division The purpose of the Zoning Division is to classify and regulate the highest and best use of buildings, structures, and land located in the unincorporated area of the County of Fresno in a manner consistent with the Fresno County General Plan. This Division incorporates zoning regulations implementing the Fresno County General Plan and all of its elements, including the Fresno County Open Space Plan.
ZONING MAP
The Zoning Map identifies zoning districts within the County at the parcel level. Figure 2.0-7 identifies the Fresno County zoning for the Project site and the surrounding area. The Development Area is zoned AL-20 (Limited Agricultural) by the County. The Non-Development Area is zoned RR (Rural Residential) by the County.
Below is a general description of County zoning within the Project site.
AL-20 (Limited Agricultural): The "AL" District is a limited agricultural district. It is intended to protect the general welfare of the agricultural community by limiting intensive uses in agricultural areas where such uses may be incompatible with, or injurious to, other less intensive agricultural operations. The District is also intended to reserve and hold certain lands for future urban use by permitting limited agriculture and by regulating those more intensive agricultural uses which, by their nature, may be injurious to non-agricultural uses in the vicinity or inconsistent with the express purpose of reservation for future urban use. The "AL" District shall be accompanied by an acreage designation which establishes the minimum size lot that may be created within the District. Acreage designation of 640, 320, 160, 80, 40, and 20 are provided for this purpose. Parcel size regulation is deemed necessary to carry out the intent of this District.
RR (Rural Residential): The "R-R" District is intended to create or preserve rural or very large lot residential homesites where a limited range of agricultural activities may be conducted. The "R-R" District is intended to be applied to areas designated as Rural Residential by the General Plan. The minimum lot size that may be created within the "R-R" District without a special acreage designation shall be two acres. The "R-R" District accompanied by the acreage designation of five establishes that the minimum lot size that may be created within the District shall be five acres.
3.10.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on land use, population, or housing if it will:
• Physically divide an established community;
• Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; 616
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-13 • Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or
• Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.10-1: The proposed Project would not physically divide an established community. (No Impact)
The Project site is located directly north of the City of Clovis limit line and is adjacent primarily to undeveloped agricultural land, rural residential land, and low-density residential uses. The Project site would result in an extension of developed uses within an area of the City that currently has approved development plans within the vicinity of the Project site. The Project would provide roadways and pedestrian pathways to connect the Project site to the existing circulation system and to allow access to and from the site. Development of the Project site would not result in physical barriers, such as a highway, wall, or other division, that would divide an existing community, but would serve as an orderly extension of existing and planned developments. The proposed Project would have no impact with regard to the physical division of an established community.
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. (Less than Significant)
Land use plans, policies, and regulations that govern the land uses on the Project site and have jurisdiction over the Project include the Fresno County General Plan, Fresno County Municipal Code, Clovis General Plan, Clovis Municipal Code, and the Fresno LAFCo Policies and Procedures for Annexation and Detachment.
FRESNO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AND FRESNO COUNTY MUNICIPAL CODE As noted previously, the Project site is currently within Fresno County and not within the City of Clovis’ Sphere of Influence. The Fresno County General Plan and Fresno County Municipal Code are the current governing documents for the Project site.
The proposed Project includes an annexation of three APNs totaling approximately 77 acres. This acreage includes the Development Area. Figure 2.0-8 illustrates the Sphere of Influence Expansion and Annexation Area. Upon annexation of the Development Area, the Fresno County General Plan and Fresno County Municipal Code would not apply to the Development Area. 617
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN
Since general plans often contain numerous policies emphasizing differing legislative goals, a development project may be “consistent” with a general plan, taken as a whole, even though the project appears to be inconsistent or arguably inconsistent with some individual policies. (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Association v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 719.) The Project is consistent with the key land use issues and development concepts of the Clovis General Plan, which provide for logical growth of the City, emphasize community form, scale, and identify, encourage attractive, sustainable neighborhoods, support public transit and bicycle and pedestrian circulation, encourage housing opportunity, promote employment and economic development, encourage a mix of land uses that balance public services and fiscal sustainability, and promote access to open space. The Project is located adjacent to the City of Clovis’ Sphere of Influence and current City limits, and will provide for housing opportunities.
When land uses are not consistent with a General Plan, there are two courses of action: 1) the uses are not allowed due to the inconsistency, or 2) the land uses are changed through an amendment to the General Plan to create consistency. The proposed Project will require a General Plan Land Use Amendment to adjust the land use designation from Low Density (L) to Medium High Density (MH) for the Development Area to accommodate the proposed development density. The proposed General Plan land use designation for the Development Area is shown on Figure 2.0-8. Approval of the General Plan amendment would ensure that the proposed Project would be substantially consistent with the Clovis General Plan land use requirements.
Additionally, the proposed Project is generally consistent with the vast majority of the applicable General Plan policies, which aim to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. As shown in Table
3.10-3, the Project is consistent with the City’s existing General Plan policies and would not conflict with policies adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect.
TABLE 3.10-3: GENERAL PLAN EXISTING POLICY CONSISTENCY
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
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.
Consistent. One of the proposed Project’s main objectives is to “Establish a mixture of housing types, sizes and
densities that collectively provide for local and regional housing demand.” As discussed in Chapter 2.0, Project
Description, 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.
LU-Policy 6.1: Amendment criteria. The City
Council may approve amendments to the
General Plan when the City Council is
Consistent. The proposed Project will require a General Plan Land Use Amendment to adjust the land use from Low
Density (L) to Medium High Density (MH) for the
Development Area to accommodate the proposed
618
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-15
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
satisfied that the following conditions are
met:
A. The proposed change is and will be
fiscally neutral or positive.
B. The proposed change can be
adequately served by public facilities and
would not negatively impact service on
existing development or the ability to
service future development.
C. The proposed change is consistent with
the Urban Village Neighborhood Concept
when within an Urban Center.
D. General Plan amendments proposing a
change from industrial, mixed-use
business campus, or office (employment
generating) land use designations to nonemployment-generating land use designation shall be accompanied by an
analysis of the potential impacts on the
City’s current and long-term jobs-housing
ratio, as well as an evaluation on the
change or loss in the types of jobs.
E. This policy does not apply to:
i. County designations within the
Clovis Planning Area or changes made
by the City Council outside of the
sphere boundary to reflect changes
made by the County of Fresno.
ii. Changes initiated by public
agencies (such as school districts,
flood control) for use by public
agencies.
iii. Changes initiated by the City
within a specific plan.
development density. The MH 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 designation for the Development
Area is shown on Figure 2.0-8 in Chapter 2.0.
The proposed Project would be fiscally positive as the
proposed residences would be subject to property tax, and the future residents of the Project would participate in the local job market and economy, thus providing sales tax
revenue.
As discussed in Section 3.12, Public Services and Recreation, all impacts related to this topic would be less than
significant.
It is also noted that the Project site is not within an Urban Center, as shown in Figure LU-3 of the City’s General Plan.
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
CIR-Policy 1.3: Age and mobility. The design
of roadways shall consider all potential users,
including children, seniors, and persons with
disabilities.
Consistent. The proposed Project includes a hierarchy of roadways to accommodate the capacity needs of the
existing street network. 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. The City’s roadway and sidewalk
standards ensure that all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities, are accommodated.
CIR-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.
Consistent. The proposed Project is not considered an infill development. However, the site has many infill
characteristics, including underutilized lands within existing development patterns. The Project site is designated for residential uses by the City’s General Plan Land Use Map. 619
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
While the proposed Project is not located near a job center, commercial areas and services are in the Project vicinity.
CIR-Policy 1.5: Neighborhood connectivity.
The transportation network shall provide
multimodal access between neighborhoods
and neighborhood-serving uses (educational,
recreational, or neighborhood commercial
uses).
Consistent. The proposed transportation network provides multimodal access and connects to adjacent developments via proposed roadways in the north, south, east, and west portions of the site. Sidewalks will also be included per the City standards.
CIR-Policy 1.6: Internal circulation. New
development shall utilize a grid or modifiedgrid street pattern. Areas designated for residential and mixed-use village
developments should feature short block
lengths of 200 to 600 feet.
Consistent. As shown in Figures 2.0-10a through 2.0-10c (in Chapter 2.0), the proposed transportation network utilizes a modified-grid street pattern with block lengths within 200 to 600 feet (depending on the location).
CIR-Policy 1.8: Network completion. New
development shall complete the extension of
stub streets planned to connect to adjacent
streets, where appropriate.
Consistent. As shown in Figures 2.0-10a through 2.0-10c (in Chapter 2.0), the proposed transportation street extends sub streets planned and/or existing to adjacent streets. For example, the northern portion of the Project includes an extension of an existing roadway that connects to the
residential uses to the north, Perrin Road.
CIR-Policy 2.1: Level of service. The following
is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:
A. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic
operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak
hours
B. Allow exceptions on a case-by-case
basis where lower levels of service would
result in other public benefits, such as:
i. Preserving agriculture or open space
land;
ii. Preserving the rural/historic
character of a neighborhood;
iii. Preserving or creating a pedestrianfriendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts;
iv. Avoiding adverse impacts to
pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit
riders;
v. Where right-of-way constraints
would make capacity expansion
infeasible.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.13, Transportation and Circulation, the existing General Plan includes a policy within the Transportation Element which requires
maintenance of a level of service (LOS) D standard on City roadways, with some exceptions. Because LOS is no longer a CEQA significance metric, an analysis of LOS is provided for the purposes of policy consistency analysis. Chapters 8 and 9 of the Transportation Impact Analysis, included in
Appendix I, discuss the LOS analysis for the Project.
Improvements have been recommended at study
intersections and roadway segments where an operational deficiency has been identified based on the results of the LOS analysis.
Table 9‐A of Appendix E summarizes the recommended
improvements for study intersections for all analysis
scenarios. Tables 9‐B, 9‐C, and 9‐D of Appendix E summarize the post‐improvement intersection LOS under existing,
near‐ term, and cumulative conditions, respectively. Table 9‐E of Appendix E summarizes the recommended
improvements for roadway segments for all analysis
scenarios. Tables 9‐F and 9‐G of Appendix E summarize the post‐improvement roadway segment LOS under near‐ term
and cumulative conditions, respectively.
CIR-Policy 2.2: Fair share costs. New
development shall pay its fair share of the
cost for circulation improvements in
accordance with the City’s traffic fee
mitigation program.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.13, with
recommended improvements described in Chapters 8 and 9
of the Transportation Analysis Report (provided in Appendix I of this EIR), all intersections would operate at LOS D or better with the addition of project trips. Furthermore, in the absence of a fee program where the project has an impact 620
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-17
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
on the roadway network, the project will pay its respective fair share for the proposed improvements.
CIR-Policy 3.1: Traffic calming. Employ trafficcalming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic
speeds and maintain safety.
Consistent. As shown in Figures 2.0-10a through 2.0-10c (in Chapter 2.0), the proposed Project includes traffic-calming measures, such as traffic circles, curb bulbouts, and center roadway pedestrian refuges.
CIR-Policy 3.4: Road diets. Minimize roadway
width as feasible to serve adjacent
neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient
space for public safety services.
Consistent. As shown in Figures 2.0-10a through 2.0-10c (in Chapter 2.0), the proposed Project includes private streets with minimized widths (37.2-feet-wide). Modified curbs for emergency vehicles are provided on the private streets.
CIR-Policy 3.6: Soundwalls. Design roadway
networks to disperse traffic to minimize
traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along
new collector and local streets when feasible.
Consistent. The proposed transportation network utilizes a modified-grid street pattern to disperse traffic and traffic noise. As discussed in Section 3.11, Noise, to meet the exterior residential standards, the unshielded residential private yards within 100 feet of the centerline of Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue must be shielded by 6-foot
sound walls. These walls must be at least 4.2 lbs/ft2
. 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. These
soundwalls are not included as part of the Project, and the Project discourages soundwalls. However, as determined by the Project-specific noise analysis, soundwalls are required in certain cases. See Mitigation Measures 3.11-3 and 3.11-4 in Section 3.11 for the sound wall mitigation requirements discussed above.
CIR-Policy 3.7: Conflict points. Minimize the
number of and enhance safety at vehicular,
pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.13, the proposed
Project will construct sidewalks on internal streets,
providing adequate connections to and throughout the site for pedestrians. The Project proposes to provide pedestrian improvements/sidewalks both internal to the project site and along the Project frontage. The project proposes to provide 8-feet wide bike lanes (Class II Bike Lane) on
Shepherd Avenue and N. Sunnyside Avenue. Additionally,
the Project will install a 12-foot trail (Class II Bike Path) adjacent to the Project along Shepherd Avenue. The Project proposes to construct a total of 0.67 miles of bike lanes along Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue.
Additionally, the Project would not conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, as discussed in Impact 3.13-2. The City’s General Plan and Active Transportation Plan aim to reduce conflicts between vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle users.
CIR-Policy 3.8: Access management.
Minimize access points and curb cuts along
arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of
Consistent. As shown in Figures 2.0-10a through 2.0-10c (in Chapter 2.0), North Sunnyside Avenue and East Shepherd
Avenue are the main arterial roadways providing access to 621
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
an intersection where possible. Eliminate
and/or consolidate driveways when new
development occurs or when traffic
operation or safety warrants.
the Development Area. The accesses to the site from these main arterial roadways are consolidated to one access at each roadway.
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.
Consistent. The Project does not include and is not located at any signalized intersections.
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
non-motorized transportation.
Consistent. The Project will include visual components that will enhance the appearance of the neighborhood once
developed. These improvements include landscaping
improvements like new street trees and other
neighborhood greenery. The Project also includes
pedestrian paths to encourage non-motorized
transportation.
Additionally, in order to reduce the visual impacts 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 design 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 requirements will produce a project that will be internally cohesive, while maintaining an aesthetic feel similar to that of the
surrounding uses.
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.
Consistent. 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. The residences would be oriented facing the internal roadway system.
CIR-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.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.13, the Project
proposes to provide 8‐feet wide bike lanes (Class II Bike Lane) on Shepherd Avenue and N. Sunnyside Avenue.
Additionally, the Project will install a 12‐foot trail (Class II Bike Path) adjacent to the Project along Shepherd Avenue.
The Project proposes to construct a total of 0.67 miles of bike lanes along Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue.
Similar to pedestrian facilities, these bicycle design features included in the Project can encourage increase active
transportation mode share in the area. As such, the existing streets along the western and southern boundaries would be upgraded as part of the Project. Further, the Project 622
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-19
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
includes new streets internal to the site, which would also have bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
CIR-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.
Consistent. As discussed previously, the Project would fund and construct bicycle improvements along existing and
proposed roadways. The Project proposes to construct bike lanes (Class II Bike Lane) on Shepherd Avenue and N.
Sunnyside Avenue. The improvements are consistent with
the City’s Active Transportation Plan, which supersedes the Bicycle Transportation Plan.
CIR-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.
Consistent. As discussed previously, the Project would
provide pedestrian facilities on-site and on the adjacent roadways. These proposed facilities would provide internal connectivity and connectivity to adjacent off-site uses.
AIR QUALITY ELEMENT
AIR-Policy 1.1: Land use and transportation.
Reduce greenhouse gas and other local
pollutant emissions through mixed use and
transit-oriented development and welldesigned transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems.
Consistent. As discussed previously, the Project includes well-designed pedestrian and bicycle systems. These
systems would help reduce mobile GHG emissions by
reducing vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT). Beyond the
proposed improvements, as required by Mitigation
Measure 3.13-1 in Section 3.13 of the Draft EIR, the
applicant would be required to implement measures, which are identified in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) Draft Handbook for Analyzing GHG Emission Reductions, assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (GHG Handbook). Many of the strategies listed in this mitigation measure pertain to transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems.
AIR-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.
Consistent. As discussed in Impact 3.3-4 in Section 3.3, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, 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 decision-makers 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.
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 site 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. 623
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
AIR-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).
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.3, the SJVAPCD
requires construction related mitigation in accordance with their rules and regulations. The proposed Project would comply with pre-existing requisite federal, State, SJVAPCD, and other local regulations and requirements, as well as implement the mitigation measures provided by the
SJVAPCD for construction-related PM10 emissions,
including those provided in Mitigation Measures 3.3-1
through 3.3-4.
AIR-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.
Consistent. The Project includes greenspace and
landscaping which would include planting of trees. These trees would provide shade, absorb carbon, improve
oxygenation, slow stormwater runoff, and reduce the heat island effect.
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY ELEMENT
ES-Policy 1.1: Flood Zone - Prohibit
development within the 100-year flood zone
and dam inundation areas unless adequate
mitigation is provided against flood hazards.
Participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program.
Consistent. As shown on Figure 3.9-2 in Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, the majority of the Project site is located within the 500-year flood zone, and the northern and northeastern portion of the Project site is within the 100-year flood zone. The area under the 100-year flood designation will undergo a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) process with FEMA, whereby the grading design will elevate the first floor of any structure one foot above the flood elevation. This process is an engineering level process that is performed during the preparation of grading and improvement plans. The majority of the Development Area within the Project site is located in an area designated to have a minimal flood hazard. The flood zone designation of the site is also not due to a reduced risk from a levee nor is it located within a regulatory floodway
ES-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.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.6 Geology and Soils, 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, 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), include design standards and requirements that are intended to
624
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-21
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
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.
Further, 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.
ES-Policy 2.1: Safe storage and maintenance.
The use and storage of hazardous materials
shall comply with applicable federal, state,
and local laws to prevent and mitigate
hazardous materials releases.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.8, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, the proposed Project includes the
development of residential structures. Each of these uses will likely use a variety of hazardous materials commonly found in urban areas including: paints, cleaners, and
cleaning solvents.
The Project would be subject to regulations pertaining to the transport and use of hazardous materials. For example, hazardous materials regulations, which are codified in CCR Titles 8 and 22, and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.5 (Section 25100 et seq.) of the California Health and Safety Code, were established at the State level to ensure compliance with federal regulations to reduce the risk to human health and the environment from the routine use of hazardous substances. Additionally, these residential hazardous materials would be stored and handled in
accordance with best management practices approved by
Fresno County Department of Community Health,
Environmental Health System (FCEHS) and the Clovis Fire Department.
ES-Policy 3.11: Airport land use compatibility.
Approve land uses in a manner that is
consistent with the Fresno Yosemite
International Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.8, there are no
documented public airports or public use airports within close proximity to the Project site. The nearest airport facility within the vicinity of the Project site is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, located approximately six miles south. The Project site is not located within the airport influence area or within the Airport’s noise exposure
contours for the Fresno Yosemite International Airport as identified in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP).
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.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.12, Public Services and Recreation, the Project proposes to include approximately
5.54 acres of open space, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks, which would not provide the park land needed to meet the four acres per 1,000 people. However, Municipal Code Chapter 3.04, Park Acquisition and Development,
states that any developer who plans for dwelling units to be constructed in the City shall pay, in addition to any other fees required to be paid by the City, a fee which shall be 625
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
calculated on the basis of park acreage designated in the Clovis General Plan consisting of the estimated total land acquisition and construction cost distributed on the basis of the remaining developable area within the sphere of
influence. In accordance with the Municipal Code, fees are deposited in specific funds that shall be used solely for the acquisition, improvement and expansion of public parks and recreation facilities as outlined in the park acquisition and improvement fee update. Thus, upon provision and
dedication of the proposed parkland and/or payment of
required fees in accordance with the Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 3.04, and other Municipal Code policies, the
proposed Project will result in a less than significant impact.
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.
Consistent. As noted above, the Project would provide
approximately 5.54 acres of open space, including 2.25
acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian
circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks. The Project would also be subject to the City’s Park Acquisition and Development fee. These fees are deposited in specific funds that shall be used solely for the acquisition, improvement and expansion of public parks and recreation facilities as outlined in the park acquisition and improvement fee update.
OSC-Policy 1.8: Funding. Require new
development to provide pocket and
neighborhood parks, dedicate land for area
parks, and pay impact fees for community
and regional parks. Require new
development to establish lighting and
landscape maintenance districts to fund
operations and maintenance.
Consistent. As noted above, the Project would provide
greenspace and would pay impact fees for community and
regional parks.
OSC-Policy 2.2: New development.
Encourage new development to incorporate
on-site natural resources and low impact
development techniques.
Consistent. The natural resources on the Project site (i.e., limited agricultural habitat for some animal species) would be converted by the Project, however the project will
include trees and greenspace to provide new resources.
However, the Project includes low impact development
techniques and implementation of best management
practices, such as the proposed stormwater drainage
system.
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.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.1, Aesthetics and Visual Resources, 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 626
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-23
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
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 to the greatest extent feasible.
OSC-Policy 2.5: Right to farm. Support,
encourage, and protect agricultural
operations within Clovis and recognize their
right to farm.
Consistent. As discussed in Impact 3.2-3 of Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources, 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. 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.
OSC-Policy 2.6: Biological resources. Support
the protection of biological resources
through the conservation of high-quality
habitat area.
Consistent. High quality habitat is not found on-site. The Project site contains limited habitat for special-status plant and animal species. In the cases where low or moderate
quality habitat exists for some species, mitigation measures are included in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR.
OSC-Policy 3.1: Stormwater management.
Encourage the use of low impact
development techniques that retain or mimic
natural features for stormwater
management.
Consistent. As noted previously, the Project includes low impact development techniques and implementation of
best management practices, such as the proposed
stormwater drainage system.
OSC-Policy 3.2: Stormwater pollution.
Minimize the use of non-point source
pollutants and stormwater runoff.
Consistent. As noted previously, the Project includes low impact development techniques and implementation of
best management practices, such as the proposed
stormwater drainage system. As discussed in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality,
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 city-maintained
landscaping, unless used for recreation
purposes
Consistent. The Project includes landscaping and
greenspace, which would be subject to the City’s Water
Efficient Landscape Requirements set forth in the City’s Municipal Code.
NOISE ELEMENT
627
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
NOI-Policy 3.1: Land use compatibility.
Approve development and require mitigation
measures to ensure existing and future land
use compatibility as shown in the Noise Level
Exposure and Land Use Compatibility Matrix
and the City's noise ordinance.
Consistent. Section 3.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR includes analysis of the potential noise impacts which may result from the Project. Impacts related to operational noise, construction noise, and cumulative noise would be lessthan-significant with mitigation included in Section 3.11.
Impacts related to excessive groundborne vibration,
groundborne noise levels, and airport noise would be less than significant.
NOI-Policy 3.2: Land use and traffic patterns.
Discourage land use and traffic patterns that
would expose sensitive land uses or noisesensitive areas to unacceptable noise levels.
Consistent. As discussed above, with mitigation, sensitive land uses or noise sensitive areas would not be exposed to unacceptable noise levels.
NOI-Policy 3.3: New residential. When new
residential development is proposed
adjacent to land designated for industrial or
commercial uses, require the proposed
development to assess potential noise
impacts and fund feasible noise-related
mitigation measures.
Consistent. Land designated for General Commercial (GC) uses is located at the southwest corner of E. Shepherd
Avenue and North Fowler Avenue, near the southeastern
corner of the Project site. This GC area includes developed commercial uses, such as the Clovis Meat Market, Me n Ed’s Pizzeria, and Ivory Bridal Boutique.
As discussed above, with mitigation, sensitive land uses or noise sensitive areas would not be exposed to unacceptable noise levels. These noise-related mitigation measures
would be implemented and funded by the Project applicant.
NOI-Policy 3.4: Acoustical study. Require an
acoustical study for proposed projects that
have the potential to exceed acceptable
noise thresholds or are exposed to existing or
future noise levels in excess of the thresholds
in the City's noise ordinance.
Consistent. A Noise Impact Study has been prepared by MD Acoustics for the Shepherd North Project and is included in Appendix H. The results of the study are included in Section
3.11, Noise, of the Draft EIR.
NOI-Policy 3.5: Site and building design.
Minimize noise impacts by requiring
appropriate site, circulation, equipment, and
building design, and sound walls,
landscaping, and other buffers.
Consistent. The Project is located in an area surrounded by existing residential development and, as such, is
appropriately located. Additionally, the proposed
transportation network utilizes a modified-grid street
pattern to disperse traffic and traffic noise. Sound walls would also be required, as necessary, via mitigation
measures in Section 3.11. The Project also includes
landscaping and greenspace.
NOI-Policy 3.11: Airport land use
compatibility. Approve land uses in a manner
that is consistent with the Fresno Yosemite
International Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.8, there are no
documented public airports or public use airports within close proximity to the Project site. The nearest airport facility within the vicinity of the Project site is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, located approximately six miles south. The Project site is not located within the airport influence area or within the Airport’s noise exposure
contours for the Fresno Yosemite International Airport as identified in the ALUCP.
NOI-Policy 3.14: Control sound at the source.
Prioritize using noise mitigation measures to
control sound at the source before buffers,
soundwalls, and other perimeter measures.
Consistent. Section 3.11, Noise, includes the following mitigation measures which require various noise controls (upgraded residential glass and sound walls) to control sound at the source:
628
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-25
GENERAL PLAN POLICY PROJECT CONSISTENCY
• Mitigation Measure 3.11-3: 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
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 3.11-4: 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.
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
PFS-Policy 1.1: New development. New
development shall pay its fair share of public
facility and infrastructure improvements.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 3.12, the Project would be required to pay the police facility fee in accordance with Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 4.11, Police Department
Fees. Additionally, the Project would be required to pay the community facility fee in accordance with Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 4.10, Fire Facility Development Impact Fee.
Further, the Project would be required to pay the school impact fees in accordance with Education Code Section
17620 and Government Code Section 65995. Lastly, the
Project would be subject to development impact fees,
library fees, and parkland fees, as required by Chapter 3.10, Development Impact Fees, Chapter 7.8, Library Facilities Development Impact Fees, and Chapter 3.04, Park
Acquisition and Development, of the City’s Municipal Code.
SOURCE: DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP, 2023.
Overall, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to the General Plan.
CLOVIS ZONING CODE
The Clovis Zoning Code implements the General Plan. The Project site is currently within the jurisdiction of Fresno County. The Fresno LAFCo will require the Project site to be pre-zoned by the City of Clovis in conjunction with the proposed annexation. The pre-zoning request is for R-1-PRD zoning designation over these lots.
629
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • 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 Medium-High Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan.
The proposed City of Clovis zoning for the Project site is shown on Figure 2.0-9.
The pre-zoning would go into effect upon annexation into the City of Clovis. The proposed zone change would ensure that zoning will be consistent with the proposed General Plan designation within the Development Area. The zoning ordinance establishes permitted uses, development densities and intensities, and development standards for each zone to ensure that public health, safety, and general welfare are protected, consistent with the purpose of the Zoning Code. All existing City development standards and zoning requirements for the proposed zoning are applicable to any activities on the Project site. The City will review each component of the proposed Project as plans (improvement plans, building plans, site plans, etc.) are submitted for final approval to ensure that they are consistent with the City’s Zoning ordinance. Approval of the pre-zoning will ensure that the proposed Project will be consistent with the Zoning Code and will have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
FRESNO LAFCO
The Project site is currently in an unincorporated portion of Fresno County, adjacent to the City of Clovis City limits, outside the Clovis SOI (as defined in the Clovis General Plan). The proposed Project requires annexation of 77 acres of the Project site into the City limits.
LAFCo is serving as a responsible agency for this EIR pursuant to their Annexation Policies and Procedures. When LAFCo is a Responsible Agency under CEQA, in order to approve the annexation, the Commission will certify that it has reviewed the Lead Agency’s environmental documents and, if required, adopt findings for approval and statements of overriding considerations in accordance with Sections 15091 and 15903 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The Fresno LAFCo will review the proposed annexation for consistency with the Annexation Policies and Procedures. These policies and procedures govern Fresno LAFCo determinations regarding annexations to all agencies. The following policies will be reviewed as part of the annexation process by the Fresno LAFCo.
1. The annexation program is consistent with LAFCo’s Sphere of influence (SOI) for the City.
Suggested actions:
• City and county shall reach agreement on development standards and planning and zoning requirements within the sphere to ensure that development within the sphere occurs in a 630
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-27 manner that reflects the concerns of the affected City and is accomplished in a manner that promotes the logical and orderly development of areas within the sphere. GC §56425 • City responds to a request to extend service outside of its City limits and SOIs in consultation with GC §56133 and Fresno LAFCo policy.
Project discussion:
The proposed Project includes an amendment of the City’s SOI to include the entirety 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 LAFCo. The SOI amendment would be reviewed by the City and LAFCo prior to proceeding with the requested annexation. If the SOI Amendment is approved, the Project would then be able to begin the annexation process.
2. The annexation program clearly implements the City’s general plan.
Suggested actions:
• City annexation applications shall describe how the proposal implements the City’s general plan, and support these statements with information from other official sources such as the annual budget, capital improvement plan, and so forth.
• A prezoning ordinance shall not be encumbered with extraneous conditions that preclude the ordinance’s effective date by the time of LAFCo hearing on the annexation.
Project discussion:
The proposed Project includes the adoption of pre-zoning for the proposed annexation area, which will serve to regulate the uses of land and structures within the Project area. The Project site is currently located outside of the Clovis City limits, and therefore does not have City-designated zoning. The proposed Project includes a request for Development Area prezoning (which is consistent with the proposed General Plan Land Use designation). The prezoning request is for Single-Family Planned Residential Development Zoning (R-1-PRD) zoning designation over the Development Area lots. The R-1-PRD district is consistent with the proposed Medium-High Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan.
The proposed City of Clovis zoning for the Project site is shown on Figure 2.0-9. The Project will be subject to the development standards as described in the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code is proposed to ensure consistency between land use and zoning designations.
3. The annexation program emphasizes the use of cities’ resolution of application versus property owner/registered voter petitions.
631
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Suggested action:
• For the City to consider opposing property owner petition-initiated reorganizations as these would not have proceeded through the process of City development review and approval, which is an important step in the management of a City’s general plan.
Project discussion:
No opposing property owner petition-initiated reorganizations exist for this Project.
4. The annexation program supports orderly growth by identifying areas to be annexed, general time frames for growth, and a plan for extension of services to these areas.
Suggested actions:
• Capital improvement plan and/or facilities plans include all lands within the SOI; • Development impact fees that fund the extension of services are established and maintained;
• Impacts to service delivery are assessed in the City’s EIR or project-specific CEQA documents and appropriately-scaled mitigation is approved and implemented. • The City coordinates its public policy documents in support of the annexation program.
Project discussion:
The Draft EIR assesses service capacity and demands for utilities services and public services.
There are not any service deficiencies noted by the City of Clovis, or contained within this EIR that are anticipated to occur after installation of infrastructure. The Project site is also designated for residential uses by the City’s General Plan.
5. The annexation program anticipates changes of organization of existing service districts and service areas in the SOI or adjacent to the SOI.
Suggested action:
• The Program should describe the transition of services that will occur when the City annexes/detaches (CID, NCFPD, FCFPD, KRCD, etc.); inversely, the document describes the status of or continuation of services when annexations do not result in detachment (FID, FMFCD, etc.).
Project discussion:
As noted previously, the Draft EIR assesses service capacity and demands for utilities services and public services. There are not any service deficiencies noted by the City of Clovis, or contained within this EIR that are anticipated to occur after installation of infrastructure. The Project site is also designated for residential uses by the City’s General Plan.
6. The annexation program anticipates the location of Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within a City’s sphere of influence.
632
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-29 Suggested action:
• Cities should become proficient in implementing their responsibilities under Senate Bill 244, should review Fresno LAFCo DUC policy and review Senate Bill 244 Technical Advisory.
Project discussion:
The Project site is not located in or adjacent to a Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities.
7. The annexation program informs citizens in annexation areas of their rights, benefits, and changes that will occur on annexation.
Suggested actions:
• City to establish and maintain on its website a description of the information above, how citizens can engage the process, how the City engages citizens and stakeholders and other information related to annexation. This information should include a description of the SOI, protest processes, and how LAFCo is involved.
• For those portions of a City’s SOI that contain a large number of rural residential parcels that are planned for urban uses, the City is strongly encouraged to develop a long-term plan to annex and serve these areas.
Project discussion:
As noted previously, the Draft EIR assesses service capacity and demands for utilities services and public services. There are not any service deficiencies noted by the City of Clovis, or contained within this EIR that are anticipated to occur after installation of infrastructure. The Project site is also designated for residential uses by the City’s General Plan. It is noted, however, the proposed annexation area was not included in the City’s latest Municipal Service Review.
8. The annexation program will be coordinated with LAFCo’s Municipal Services Review (MSR) for the City.
Suggested action:
• City applications should include an assessment of current MSR determinations and recommendations.
Project discussion:
As noted previously, the Draft EIR assesses service capacity and demands for utilities services and public services. There are not any service deficiencies noted by the City of Clovis, or contained within this EIR that are anticipated to occur after installation of infrastructure. The Project site is also designated for residential uses by the City’s General Plan. It is noted, however, the proposed annexation area was not included in the City’s latest Municipal Service Review. 633
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
9. The annexation program is managed by an assigned and responsible City staff member.
Suggested action:
• City identifies a staff member to serve as a genuine point of contact with LAFCo, that is, a staff member responsible and accountable for managing applications, knowledgeable of the project and of LAFCo’s process, and empowered to facilitate the City’s annexation program.
Project discussion:
This requirement applies to the City and not individual development projects.
H10. City entitlement analysis is integrated with LAFCo policies Suggested action:
• Local agencies, including Fresno County, are strongly advised to include Fresno LAFCo in their initial request for comments.
• When initial planning applications that will eventually require annexation are submitted to cities, they are encouraged to submit a pre-application to LAFCo so that LAFCo can track the project at its beginning and provide comments that would facilitate annexation in time for these to be considered in a timely and efficient manner.
Project discussion:
This City has coordinated with LAFCo through the release of the Notice of Preparation and invitation to the Scoping meeting. The City will ultimately coordinate with LAFCo if the City decides that the Project site should be annexed into the City of Clovis. At that time, the City would submit the appropriate applications and documentations for LAFCo’s consideration of the City’s annexation approval.
The policies discussed above are intended to ensure orderly reorganization to local jurisdictional boundaries, including annexations. Ultimately, LAFCo will determine whether the proposed annexation would first require an update to the Clovis Municipal Service Review in order to approve the annexation. This LAFCo policy was not specifically adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect, rather it is intended to ensure orderly and logical reorganization to local jurisdiction boundaries, including annexations. The proposed Project is consistent with LAFCo policies adopted to address environmental impacts. As such, implementation of the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.10-3: The proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth in an area. (Less than Significant)
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR evaluate the growth-inducing impacts of a proposed action. A growth-inducing impact is defined by the CEQA Guidelines as:
634
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.10-31 The way in which a proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth…It is not assumed that growth in an area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, growth inducement is any growth that exceeds planned growth of an area and results in new development that would not have taken place without implementation of the project. A project can have direct and/or indirect growth inducement potential. Direct growth inducement would result if a project, for example, involved construction of new housing. A project would have indirect growth inducement potential if it established substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial, industrial, or governmental enterprises) or if it would involve a construction effort with substantial short-term employment opportunities that would indirectly stimulate the need for additional housing and services to support the new employment demand (Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Board of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342). Similarly, a project would indirectly induce growth if it would remove an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public service.
A project providing an increased water supply or wastewater treatment/collection in an area where this service historically limited growth could be considered growth-inducing.
The State CEQA Guidelines further explain that the environmental effects of induced growth are considered indirect impacts of the proposed action. These indirect impacts or secondary effects of growth may result in significant, adverse environmental impacts. Potential secondary effects of growth include increased demand on other community and public services and infrastructure, increased traffic and noise, and adverse environmental impacts such as degradation of air and water quality, degradation or loss of plant and animal habitat, and conversion of agricultural and open space land to developed uses.
Growth inducement may constitute an adverse impact if the growth is not consistent with or accommodated by the land use plans and growth management plans and policies for the area affected. Local land use plans provide for land use development patterns and growth policies that allow for the orderly expansion of urban development supported by adequate urban public services, such as water supply, roadway infrastructure, sewer service, and solid waste service.
Components of Growth: The timing, magnitude, and location of land development and population growth in a region are based on various interrelated land use and economic variables. Key variables include regional economic trends, market demand for residential and non-residential uses, land availability and cost, the availability and quality of transportation facilities and public services, proximity to employment centers, the supply and cost of housing, and regulatory policies or conditions. Since the general plan of a community defines the location, type, and intensity of growth, it is the primary means of regulating development and growth in California. It is noted that the City of Clovis Housing Element specifically mentions the Project site for residential development, which means that the growth is consistent with anticipated growth for the City. 635
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
3.10-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
GROWTH EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
Direct Population Growth: The proposed Project proposes housing that would result in direct population growth. The proposed Project includes the addition of 605 residential units. Using the most recent Department of Finance (2022) estimate for the average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit in the City of Clovis of 2.81, the addition of 605 housing units could increase the population of the City by an estimated 1,700 persons.
The proposed Project will require a General Plan Land Use Amendment to adjust the land use from Rural Residential (RR) for the Development Area to accommodate the proposed development density. The proposed General Plan land use designation for the Project site is shown on Figure 2.0- 8 in Chapter 2.0.
Indirect Population Growth: Projects that include employment generating uses have the potential to result in indirect population growth through the creation of jobs or the extension of infrastructure into areas that were not previously served. As noted in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, the proposed Project does not include the development of employment generating uses within the Development Area. In addition, the proposed infrastructure improvements would be adequately sized to serve the proposed Project only. The proposed infrastructure would not be oversized to accommodate any growth beyond the Project site into areas that were not previously served. While the proposed Project will result in growth, it is not anticipated to significantly induce growth.
Implementation of the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.10-4: The proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. (No Impact)
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 (pecan orchards). Development of the Project would add 605 residential units. Therefore, because no housing is located in the Development Area, the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. The proposed Project will have no impact related to the displacement of substantial numbers of people or existing housing. 636
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-1 This section provides a general description of the existing noise sources in the Project vicinity, a discussion of the regulatory setting, and identifies potential noise impacts associated with the proposed Project. Project impacts are evaluated relative to applicable noise level criteria and to the existing ambient noise environment. Mitigation measures have been identified for significant noiserelated impacts. A Noise Impact Study has been prepared by MD Acoustics for the Shephard North Project and is included in Appendix H.
There were no comments received during the NOP scoping process related to this environmental topic.
3.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
KEY TERMS
Acoustics The science of sound.
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given area consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre-project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.
Attenuation The reduction of noise.
A-Weighting A frequency-response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response. A-weighted dB values are expressed as dBA.
Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound, defined as ten times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared.
CNEL Community noise equivalent level. Defined as the 24-hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 - 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.
Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic acoustic signal, expressed in cycles per second or Hertz.
Impulsive Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.
Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.
Leq Equivalent or energy-averaged sound level.
Lmax The highest root-mean-square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.
L(n) The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period.
For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the one hour period.
Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.
Noise Unwanted sound.
SEL Sound exposure levels. A rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train passby, that compresses the total sound energy into a one-second event.
637
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
FUNDAMENTALS OF ACOUSTICS
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).
Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.
The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A-weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dB) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A-weighted levels, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted.
The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted, an increase of 10 dB is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70-dB sound is half as loud as an 80-dB sound, and twice as loud as a 60-dB sound.
Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all-encompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.
The day/night average level (Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10 decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours.
The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment. CNEL is similar to Ldn, but includes 638
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-3 a +5-dB penalty for evening noise. Table 3.11-1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations.
TABLE 3.11-1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
COMMON OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES NOISE LEVEL (DB) COMMON INDOOR ACTIVITIES --110-- Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft) --100--
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) --90--
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft),
at 80 km/hr (50 mph) --80--
Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft)
Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft) --70-- Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) --60-- Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft) Quiet Urban Daytime --50--
Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime --40--
Theater, Large Conference Room
(Background)
Quiet Suburban Nighttime --30-- Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime --20--
Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall
(Background)
--10-- Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing --0-- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing SOURCE: CALTRANS, TECHNICAL NOISE SUPPLEMENT, TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS PROTOCOL. SEPTEMBER 2013.
EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
• Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction; • Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning; and • Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling.
Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.
Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called ambient noise level.
In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it. With regard to increases in A-weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a 1 dB change cannot be perceived; • Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dB change is considered a just-perceivable difference; 639
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • A change in level of at least 5-dB is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
• A 10-dB change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness, and can cause an adverse response.
Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6 dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres, or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.
EXISTING NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS
Existing Ambient Noise Levels
To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the Project Vicinity, three 15-min ambient noise measurements were conducted at or near the Project site. The noise measurements were taken to determine the existing ambient noise levels. Noise data indicates that traffic along Shepherd Avenue is the primary source of noise impacting the Project site and the adjacent uses.
The results of the short-term noise data are presented in Table 3.11-2. Appendix H shows the complete results of the noise monitoring survey.
The sound level meters were programmed to collect hourly noise level intervals at each site during the survey. The maximum value (Lmax) represents the highest noise level measured during an interval. The average value (Leq) represents the energy average of all of the noise measured during an interval. The median value (L50) represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during an interval.
TABLE 3.11-2: EXISTING SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA
DATE TIME
AVERAGE MEASURED HOURLY NOISE LEVELS, DB(A)
LEQ LMAX LMIN L2 L8 L25 L50 L90
12/20/2022 7:53AM8:08AM 46.4 68.0 38.0 53.3 46.9 45.2 43.9 41.6 12/20/2022 8:27AM8:42AM 69.1 82.2 55.7 77.4 72.0 68.7 66.4 62.6 12/20/2022 9:01AM9:16AM 46.0 63.5 34.5 56.8 48.8 39.4 37.3 35.6 SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2023.
Noise data shown in Table 3.11-2 above indicates the ambient noise level ranged from 46 to 69 dBA Leq at the Project site. Maximum levels reached up to 82 dBA at location 2 as a result of traffic of heavy trucks along Shepherd Avenue.
640
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-5 Construction Vibration
Construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building structural damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of perception.
Building damage can take the form of cosmetic or structural damage.
The fundamental equation used to calculate vibration propagation through average soil conditions and distance is as follows:
PPVequipment = PPVref (100/Drec)
n
Where: PPVref = reference PPV at 100ft.
Drec = distance from equipment to receiver in ft.
n = 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through ground) Table 3.11-3 gives approximate vibration levels for particular construction activities. This data provides a reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil conditions.
TABLE 3.11-3: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY
(INCHES/SECOND) AT 25 FEET
APPROXIMATE VIBRATION LEVEL LV
(DVB) AT 25 FEET
Pile driver (impact)
1.518 (upper range) 112
0.644 (typical) 104
Pile driver (sonic)
0.734 upper range 105
0.170 typical 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66
(slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
SOURCE: TRANSIT NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT, FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, MAY 2006.
The thresholds from the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual in Table 3.11-4 (below) provides general thresholds and guidelines as to the vibration damage potential from vibratory impacts.
641
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North TABLE 3.11-4: GUIDELINE VIBRATION DAMAGE POTENTIAL THRESHOLD CRITERIA
STRUCTURE AND CONDITION
MAXIMUM PPV (IN/SEC)
TRANSIENT SOURCES
CONTINUOUS/FREQUENT
INTERMITTENT SOURCES
Extremely fragile historic buildings,
ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
New residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial
buildings 2.0 0.5
NOTES:
TRANSIENT SOURCES CREATE A SINGLE ISOLATED VIBRATION EVENT, SUCH AS BLASTING OR DROP BALLS. CONTINUOUS/FREQUENT
INTERMITTENT SOURCES INCLUDE IMPACT
PILE DRIVERS, POGO-STICK COMPACTORS, CRACK-AND-SEAT EQUIPMENT, VIBRATORY PILE DRIVERS, AND VIBRATORY COMPACTION EQUIPMENT.
SOURCE: TABLE 19, TRANSPORTATION AND CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION GUIDANCE MANUAL, CALTRANS, SEPT. 2013.
3.11.2 REGULATORY SETTING
FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations related to noise that apply to the proposed Project.
STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, indicate that a significant noise impact may occur if a Project exposes persons to noise or vibration levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels. CEQA standards are discussed more below under the Thresholds of Significance section.
California State Building Codes
The State Building Code, Title 24, Part 2 of the State of California Code of Regulations establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards to protect persons within new buildings which house people, including hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses and dwellings other than single-family dwellings. Title 24 mandates that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn or CNEL in any habitable room.
Title 24 also mandates that for structures containing noise-sensitive uses to be located where the Ldn or CNEL exceeds 60 dB, an acoustical analysis must be prepared to identify mechanisms for 642
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-7 limiting exterior noise to the prescribed allowable interior levels. If the interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be kept closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment.
CITY OF CLOVIS
The City of Clovis General Plan
The City of Clovis General Plan Noise Element contains goals, policies, and implementation measures for assessing noise impacts within the City. Listed below are the noise goals, policies, and implementation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project:
POLICES: NOISE ELEMENT
• Policy 3.1. Land use compatibility. Approve development and require mitigation measures to ensure existing and future land use compatibility as shown in the Noise Level Exposure and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and the City's noise ordinance. • Policy 3.2. Land use and traffic patterns. Discourage land use and traffic patterns that would expose sensitive land uses or noise-sensitive areas to unacceptable noise levels. • Policy 3.3. New residential. When new residential development is proposed adjacent to land designated for industrial or commercial uses, require the proposed development to assess potential noise impacts and fund feasible noise-related mitigation measures. • Policy 3.4. Acoustical study. Require an acoustical study for proposed projects that have the potential to exceed acceptable noise thresholds or are exposed to existing or future noise levels in excess of the thresholds in the City's noise ordinance. • Policy 3.5. Site and building design. Minimize noise impacts by requiring appropriate site, circulation, equipment, and building design, and sound walls, landscaping, and other buffers.
• Policy 3.6. Noise impacts. Minimize or eliminate persistent, periodic, or impulsive noise impacts of business operations.
• Policy 3.7. Mixed-use buildings. Require that mixed-use structures be designed to prevent transfer of noise and vibration between uses.
• Policy 3.8. Existing uses. Require the use of noise abatement devices for existing uses that exceed acceptable noise thresholds.
• Policy 3.9. Caltrans facilities. Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure the inclusion of noise mitigation measures in the design of new highway projects or improvements to existing facilities.
• Policy 3.10. Airport changes. Coordinate with the Fresno Yosemite International Airport to minimize noise impacts on properties in Clovis due to changes in flight patterns or airport expansion.
• Policy 3.11. Airport land use compatibility. Approve land uses in a manner that is consistent with the Fresno Yosemite International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. 643
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Policy 3.12. Truck traffic. Plan and maintain truck routes that avoid noise-sensitive land uses and areas. Encourage business delivery areas to be located away from residential properties and to mitigate associated noise impacts.
• Policy 3.13. Small aircraft and helicopters. Minimize the noise impact of small aircraft and helicopters on residential neighborhoods.
• Policy 3.14. Control sound at the source. Prioritize using noise mitigation measures to control sound at the source before buffers, soundwalls, and other perimeter measures.
The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of clearly compatible, normally compatible, normally incompatible, and clearly incompatible as illustrated in Exhibit D [Table 3.11-5].
TABLE 3.11-5: LAND USE AND NOSIE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX
LAND USE
ENERGY AVERAGE (CNEL)
< 55 60 65 70 75 80>
Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, meeting hall B B C C D D D Mobile home A A B C C D D
Hospital, library, school, faith/religious uses A A B C C D D Hotel, motel, transient lodging A A B B C C D
Single family, multifamily, faith/religious uses A A B B C D D Parks A A A B C D D
Office building, research & development, professional office, city office building, and hotel A A A B B C D
Amusement park, miniature golf, go-cart track, health club, equestrian center A A A B B D D
Golf courses, nature centers, cemeteries, wildlife reserves, wildlife habitat A A A A B C C
Commercial retail, bank, restaurant, movie theater A A A A B B C Automobile service station, auto dealer, manufacturing, warehousing, wholesale, utilities A A A A B B B
Agriculture A A A A A A A
SOURCE: CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN, NOISE ELEMENT, EXHIBIT D.
City of Clovis Municipal Code Noise Ordinance
Chapter 9.22.080 and 9.22.100 General Performance Standards of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's noise ordinance.
9.22.080 - NOISE
The following noise standards, unless otherwise specifically indicated, shall apply to all property with a designated noise zone:
644
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-9 TABLE 3.11-6: MAXIMUM EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS
NOISE ZONE TYPE OF LAND USE
ALLOWABLE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL
(15-MINUTE LEQ)
7 A.M. TO 10 P.M. 10 P.M. TO 7 A.M.
I Single-, two- or multiple-family residential 55 dBA 50 dBA II Commercial 65 dBA 60 dBA
III Residential portions of mixed use properties 60 dBA 50 dBA IV Industrial or manufacturing 70 dBA 70 dBA
SOURCE: SECTION 9.22.080, CLOVIS MUNICIPAL CODE.
TABLE 3.11-7: MAXIMUM INTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS
NOISE ZONE TYPE OF LAND USE
ALLOWABLE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL
(15-MINUTE LEQ)
7 A.M. TO 10 P.M. 10 P.M. TO 7 A.M.
I Residential 45 dBA 40 dBA
II Administrative/professional office 50 dBA --
III Residential portions of mixed use properties 45 dBA 40 dBA SOURCE: SECTION 9.22.080, CLOVIS MUNICIPAL CODE.
If the ambient noise level exceeds the resulting standard, the ambient shall be the standard.
It is unlawful for any person to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on any property measured at the property line, to exceed either of the following within the incorporated area of the City:
• The noise standard for the applicable zone for any fifteen (15) minute period; • A maximum impulsive noise level equal to the value of the noise standard plus twenty (20) dBA for any period of time (measured using A-weighted slow response). Impulsive noise which repeats four (4) or more times in any hour between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. shall be measured as continuous sound and meet the noise standard for the applicable zone.
When properties of two (2) different noise zones abut one another, the maximum exterior noise level shall be the lower of the two (2) noise zones where one zone is residential, and in other contexts shall be the average of the two (2) zones.
Commercial, industrial, and recreational uses which create impulsive noise as part of their regular processes, such as through the use of pile drivers, forge hammers, punch presses, and gunshots, shall not be located in any zone district adjacent to a residential zone district unless a noise study is completed demonstrating the impulsive noise does not exceed the standards at the property line for the residential zone district. Impulse noise from these uses shall be measured as continuous sound. The noise study shall be subject to review and approval by the Director or his or her designee, and shall be completed as part of any discretionary permit process for the use or prior to obtaining 645
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North a building permit. This provision shall not apply to uses existing on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title.
Emergency electrical generators in residential zone districts shall comply with the California Building Code and California Residential Code, as amended, for the installation and operation of the emergency generator. Test cycle operation shall be limited to the hours between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Emergency electrical generators are intended to provide emergency power to run air conditioning, medical equipment and other household appliances in the event of a rolling blackout or other power grid failure.
Measurement of sound levels. Measurement of sound levels shall be as follows:
• Sound level meter. Sound levels shall be measured on the A-weighting network of a sound level meter meeting the requirements of ASA Standards S14-1971 for General Purpose Sound Level Meters, or the latest revision published by the American National Standards Institute, Inc., using the slow meter response. The meter shall be calibrated and used according to the manufacturer's instructions.
• Location of microphone. Measurements shall be taken with the microphone located at any point on the property line of the noise source, but no closer than three feet (3') from any wall and not less than three feet (3') above the ground. • Minimum of two (2) readings. A minimum of two (2) readings shall be taken for a period of ten (10) minutes each with ten (10) minute intervals between measurements. The sound level shall be the average of these readings.
Activities exempt from regulations. The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this section:
• Emergency exemption. The emission of sound for the purpose of alerting persons to the existence of an emergency, or the emission of sound in the performance of emergency work.
• Warning devices. Warning devices necessary for the protection of public safety, (e.g., ambulance, fire, and police sirens, and train horns).
• Railroad activities. All locomotives and rail cars operated by a railroad that is regulated by the State Public Utilities Commission.
• Federal or State pre-exempted activities. Any activity, to the extent regulation thereof has been pre-exempted by Federal or State law.
• Pre-existing uses. Uses existing at the time of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title, which are in compliance with all applicable standards in effect prior to adoption, 646
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-11 and which are not otherwise operating as a nuisance in violation of Article 6 of Chapter 27 of Title 5.
• Public health and safety activities. All transportation, flood control, and utility maintenance and construction operations conducted by government entities or utility companies at any time on public rights-of-way, and those situations that may occur on private property deemed necessary to serve the best interests of the public and to protect the public's health and well-being, including, but not limited to: debris and limb removal; removal of damaged poles and vehicles; removal of downed wires; restoring electrical service; repairing traffic signals; repair of water hydrants; repair of mains, gas lines, oil lines, and sewers; repair and maintenance of flood control and storm water facilities; repair and maintenance of streets and sidewalks.
• Ordinary municipal activities. Ordinary municipal activities conducted by the City or other entity having jurisdiction in the City, including, but not limited to: solid waste collection; street sweeping; operation, maintenance, and repair of water production, treatment, and distribution facilities; operation, maintenance, and repair of sewage treatment, collection and distribution facilities; and vacuuming catch basins. • Public safety training activities. Training activities by fire, law enforcement, and public utility officials that cannot reasonably take place within the parameters of this section, including but not limited to training that involves: hydrant testing, pumping hose lays, running chain saws, operating power tools, demolition, vehicle noise, and use of generators. • Public celebrations. Public celebrations, holidays, or occasions generally celebrated, or public parades held under authorized permits; any sporting event or activity conducted under the direction and supervision of any public or private school.
Acts deemed violations of section. The following acts are a violation of this section:
• Noise-related nuisances defined in Chapter 27 of Title 5. Violations of Article 6 of Chapter 27 of Title 5 pertaining to unlawful noise-related nuisances shall also be considered a violation of this section.
• Construction noise. Construction activities shall be subject to the provisions of Section
5.27.604, which sets forth the permissible hours for construction activity. At all other times, no person shall operate, or cause to be operated, tools or equipment used in alteration, construction, demolition, drilling, or repair work so that the sound creates a noise disturbance across a residential property line, except for emergency work. Stationary equipment (e.g., generators) shall not be located adjacent to any existing residences unless enclosed in a noise attenuating structure, subject to the review and approval of the Director. • Places of public entertainment. Operating, playing, or allowing the operation or playing of a drum, musical instrument, phonograph, radio, sound amplifier, television, or similar device 647
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North that produces, reproduces, or amplifies sound in a place of public entertainment at a sound level greater than ninety-five (95) dBA (read by the slow response on a sound level meter) at any point that is normally occupied by a customer is prohibited, unless conspicuous signs are located near each public entrance, stating "Warning: Sound Levels Within May Cause Hearing Impairment."
• Stationary nonemergency signaling devices. Sounding or allowing the sounding of an electronically amplified signal from a stationary bell, chime, siren, whistle, or similar device intended primarily for nonemergency purposes, from any place, for more than ten (10) consecutive seconds in any hourly period is prohibited. • Compacting mechanisms. Operating or allowing the operation of the compacting mechanism of any motor vehicle that compacts refuse and that creates, during the compacting cycle, a sound level in excess of eighty-five (85) dBA when measured at fifty feet (50') from any point of the vehicle is prohibited between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.
• Vehicle or motorboat repairs and testing. Repairing, rebuilding, modifying, or testing any motor vehicle, motorcycle, or motorboat in a manner as to cause a noise disturbance across property lines or within a noise-sensitive zone is prohibited.
Responsibility to eliminate or reduce acts deemed violations of section. Improvements to eliminate or reduce negative impacts between uses deemed violations of this section shall be provided by the new use, rather than the existing use. (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff. October 8, 2014; § 1(2) (Atts. 1, 2), Ord. 20-18, eff. February 3, 2021)
9.22.100 VIBRATIONS
Uses that generate vibrations that may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property shall be corrected, cushioned, or isolated to prevent the continued generation of vibrations. Uses shall be operated in compliance with the following provisions. • Not perceptible along property line. Uses shall not generate ground vibration that is perceptible without instruments by the average person at any point along or beyond the property line of the parcel containing the activities which generate the vibration; • No discomfort or annoyance. Uses, activities, and processes shall not generate ground vibration that causes discomfort or annoyance to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity or which endangers the comfort, health, or peace of residents whose property abuts the property lines of the subject parcel.
• No interference. Uses shall not generate ground vibration that interferes with the operations of equipment and facilities on adjoining parcels. 648
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-13 • Temporary construction exempt. Vibrations from temporary construction/demolition and vehicles that leave the subject parcel (e.g., trucks) are exempt from the provisions of this section. (§ 2, Ord. 14- 13, eff. October 8, 2014).
3.11.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
STUDY METHOD AND PROCEDURE
The following section describes the noise modeling procedures and assumptions used for this noise impact assessment.
Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors:
• Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as the first row of houses • Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent to the area of concern • Human land usage
• Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination
MD conducted the sound level measurements in accordance with the City’s and Caltrans’s (TeNS) technical noise specifications. All measurement equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA).
The following gives a brief description of the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement procedures for sound level measurements:
• Microphones for sound level meters were placed 5 feet above the ground for all measurements
• Sound level meters were calibrated (Larson Davis CAL 200) before and after each measurement
• Following the calibration of equipment, a windscreen was placed over the microphone • Frequency weighting was set on “A” and slow response
• Results of the long-term noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets • During any short-term noise measurements, any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local traffic, lawnmowers, or aircraft fly-overs were noted • Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented 649
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Noise monitoring locations were selected based on the nearest sensitive receptors relative to the proposed onsite noise sources. Three (3) short-term 15-min noise measurement was conducted at or near the Project site and are illustrated in Exhibit E of Appendix H. Appendix H includes photos, a field sheet, and measured noise data.
Traffic noise from vehicular traffic was projected using a computer program that replicates the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The FHWA model arrives at the predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL).
Roadway volumes correspond to the LSA Associates, Inc. segment projections in Appendix E. It's assumed that the peak hour is 10% of the ADT. The referenced traffic data was applied to the model and is in Appendix H. The following outlines the key adjustments made to the REMEL for the roadway inputs:
• Roadway classification – (e.g., freeway, major arterial, arterial, secondary, collector, etc.), • Roadway Active Width – (distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway)
• Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT), Travel Speeds, Percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks
• Roadway grade and angle of view
• Site Conditions (e.g., soft vs. hard)
• Percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour period Table 3.11-8 indicates the vehicle distribution utilized for this study.
TABLE 3.11-8: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
MOTOR-VEHICLE TYPE
DAYTIME
%
(7AM TO 7
PM)
EVENING % (7 PM TO 10
PM)
NIGHT % (10 PM TO 7
AM)
TOTAL % OF TRAFFIC
FLOW
Automobiles 75.5 14.0 10.5 97.42
Medium Trucks 48.9 2.2 48.9 1.84
Heavy Trucks 47.3 5.4 47.3 0.74
SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2023.
MD utilized segment projections from LSA Associates, Inc. obtained January 2023. The following outlines key adjustments to the REMEL for Project site parameter inputs:
• Vertical and horizontal distances (Sensitive receptor distance from noise source) • Noise barrier vertical and horizontal distances (Noise barrier distance from sound source and receptor)
650
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-15 • Traffic noise source spectra
• Topography
The construction noise analysis utilizes the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RNCM), together with several key construction parameters. Key inputs include distance to the sensitive receiver, equipment usage, % usage factor, and baseline parameters for the Project site. The Project was analyzed based on the different construction phases. Construction noise is expected to be loudest during the grading, concrete, and building phases of construction. The construction noise calculation output worksheet is located in Appendix H.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the Project will have a significant impact related to noise if it will result in:
Would the Project:
a. 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?
b. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
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 or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) To predict existing and cumulative noise levels due to traffic, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used. The modeling is theoretical and does not take into account any existing barriers, structures, and/or topographical features that may further reduce noise levels. Therefore, the levels are shown for comparative purposes only to show the difference between with and without project conditions. In addition, the noise contours for 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL were calculated. The potential off-site noise impacts caused by an increase of traffic from operation of the proposed Project on the nearby roadways 651
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North were calculated for existing, existing plus Project, cumulative 2046, and cumulative 2046 plus project scenarios.
Table 3.11-9 and 3.11-10 compare the existing and existing plus project scenario. A change of 3 dB or more is required to have a perceptible difference in noise levels.
TABLE 3.11-9: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT SCENARIO - NOISE LEVELS ALONG ROADWAYS (DBA CNEL)
ROADWAY SEGMENT
EXISTING EXISTING WITH PROJECT
CNEL @ 50' DBA CNEL @ 50' DBA CHANGE IN NOISE
LEVEL
Behymer Avenue Willow Avenue to
Minnewawa Avenue 60.4 60.5 0.1
Behymer Avenue Minnewawa Avenue to
Sunnyside Avenue 62.5 62.5 0.0
Behymer Avenue Sunnyside Avenue to
Fowler Avenue 62.4 62.4 0.0
Shepherd Avenue Willow Avenue to
Minnewawa Avenue 67.7 68.2 0.5
Shepherd Avenue Minnewawa Avenue to
Clovis Avenue 67.3 68.2 0.9
Shepherd Avenue Clovis Avenue to
Sunnyside Avenue 66.6 68.2 1.6
Shepherd Avenue Sunnyside Avenue to
Project Intersection
(Fordham Avenue) 3
65.1 66.8 1.7
Shepherd Avenue Project Intersection
(Fordham Avenue) 3 to
Fowler Avenue
65.1 65.8 0.7
Herndon Avenue State Route 168
Eastbound Ramps to
Clovis Avenue
69.4 69.6 0.2
Willow Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Shepherd Avenue 72.4 72.5 0.1
Minnewawa Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Shepherd Avenue 63.5 63.5 0.0
Clovis Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 64.1 65.3 1.2
Clovis Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 66.3 66.9 0.6
Clovis Avenue Nees Avenue to Alluvial
Avenue 67.9 68.4 0.5
Clovis Avenue Alluvial Avenue to
Herndon Avenue 69.9 70.2 0.3
Sunnyside Avenue Project Intersection 1 to
Shepherd Avenue 54.4 60.5 6.1
Sunnyside Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 60.3 61.6 1.3
652
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-17
ROADWAY SEGMENT
EXISTING EXISTING WITH PROJECT
CNEL @ 50' DBA CNEL @ 50' DBA CHANGE IN NOISE
LEVEL
Sunnyside Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 60.6 61.8 1.2
Fowler Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Ticonderoga 63.4 63.5 0.1
Fowler Avenue Ticonderoga to Shepherd
Avenue 64.4 64.4 0.0
Fowler Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 65.1 65.7 0.6
Fowler Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 65.1 65.7 0.6
Fowler Avenue Nees Avenue to State
Route 168 Westbound
Ramps
69.9 70.1 0.2
SOURCE: FHWA-RD-77-108 WITH INPUTS FROM MD ACOUSTICS. 2023.
When comparing existing plus project levels to existing levels, Sunnyside Avenue from Project Intersection 1 to Shepherd Avenue has the potential for significant impact as the only roadway segment with an increase of more than 3 dB.
NOISE IMPACTS TO ON-SITE RECEPTORS DUE TO PROJECT GENERATED TRAFFIC The Project's proposed residential properties are outside of Shepherd Avenue's and Sunnyside Avenue's 70 dBA CNEL contours. Residences along the first row of Sunnyside will experience levels up to 69.9 dBA CNEL at the property line. Residences along Shepherd Avenue will be exposed to levels up to 69.1 dBA CNEL at the property line. These are within the normally compatible levels for residential uses, but above the exterior 65 dBA CNEL standard as outlined in Table ES-1 of the 2014 General Plan.
To meet the exterior residential standards of 65 dBA CNEL, the unshielded residential private yards within 100 ft of the centerline of Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue must be shielded by 6- foot sound walls. These walls must be at least 4.2 lbs/ft2. 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. The noise calculations show that along Shepherd Avenue a 6’ soundwall placed at 70 feet from the centerline would result in noise attenuation from 69.1 dBA CNEL down to a range of 62.7 to 63.1 dBA CNEL depending on the precise location along Shepherd Avenue. This range is below the 65 dBA CNEL noise standards with the 6’ soundwall.
The noise calculations also show that along Sunnyside Avenue a 6’ soundwall placed at 47 feet from the centerline would result in noise attenuation from 69.9 dBA CNEL down to a range of 63.7 dBA CNEL. This is below the 65 dBA CNEL noise standards with the 6’ soundwall. 653
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
OPERATIONAL NOISE INCREASES
The proposed Project would include typical residential noise sources which would be compatible with the adjacent existing residential uses (a.k.a. neighborhood traffic, yard equipment, truck deliveries, garbage collected, etc.). Proposed neighborhood parks are located internal to the Project site and would not impact off-site residential uses.
EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE AT PROPOSED USES
The Project's proposed residential properties are outside of Shepherd Avenue's and Sunnyside Avenue's 70 dBA CNEL contours. Residences along the first row of Sunnyside will experience levels up to 69.9 dBA CNEL at the property line. Residences along Shepherd Avenue will be exposed to levels up to 69.1 dBA CNEL at the property line. These are within the normally compatible levels for residential uses, but above the exterior 65 dBA CNEL standard as outlined in Table ES-1 of the 2014 General Plan. Thus, this is considered a potentially significant impact.
To meet the exterior residential standards, the unshielded residential private yards within 100 ft of the centerline of Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue must be shielded by 6-foot sound walls as required by Mitigation Measure 3.11-1. As previously discussed, the noise calculations show that along Shepherd Avenue a 6’ soundwall placed at 70 feet from the centerline would result in noise attenuation from 69.1 dBA CNEL down to a range of 62.7 to 63.1 dBA CNEL depending on the precise location along Shepherd Avenue. This range is below the 65 dBA CNEL noise standards with the 6’ soundwall.
The noise calculations also show that along Sunnyside Avenue a 6’ soundwall placed at 47 feet from the centerline would result in noise attenuation from 69.9 dBA CNEL down to a range of 63.7 dBA CNEL. This is below the 65 dBA CNEL noise standards with the 6’ soundwall.
Furthermore, as required by Mitigation Measure 3.11-2, 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. Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure that these potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.
INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS AT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL USES
Modern construction typically provides a 25-dB exterior-to-interior noise level reduction with windows closed. Therefore, sensitive receptors exposed to exterior noise of 70 dB Ldn, or less, will typically comply with the City of Clovis 45 dB Ldn interior noise level standard. Additional noise reduction measures, such as acoustically-rated windows, are generally required for exterior noise levels exceeding 70 dB Ldn.
As mentioned before, the Project's proposed residential properties are outside of Shepherd Avenue's and Sunnyside Avenue's 70 dBA CNEL contours. Residences along the first row of Sunnyside will experience levels up to 69.9 dBA CNEL at the property line. Residences along 654
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-19 Shepherd Avenue will be exposed to levels up to 69.1 dBA CNEL at the property line. Based upon a 25-dB exterior-to-interior noise level reduction, interior noise levels are predicted to be approximately 44 dB Ldn. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
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 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. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
During the construction of the Project, including roads, water, sewer lines, and related infrastructure, noise from construction activities would add to the noise environment in the Project vicinity. Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities are taken outside the allowable times as described in the City of Clovis Municipal Code Section 5.27.604. Construction is anticipated to occur during the permissible hours according to the City's Municipal Code. Construction noise will have a temporary or periodic increase in the ambient noise level above the existing within the Project vicinity. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full-power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Noise levels will be the loudest during the grading phase. The modeling assumes construction equipment as close as 25 feet from the adjacent residences and an average of 550 feet away from the adjacent residences. Unmitigated noise levels at 550 feet have the potential to reach 60 dBA Leq and 92 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptors during grading. Noise levels for the other construction phases would be lower, approximately from 46 to 59 dBA Leq and 86 to 93 dBA Lmax. This would be a 13 dB Leq daytime increase in the ambient noise level at the residents along Perrin Rd., Purdue Ave., and East Lexington Ave.
655
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Furthermore, noise reduction policies within the General Plan and standards within the Municipal Code are provided to further reduce construction noise. Mitigation Measure 3.11-3 embodies a preexisting legal requirement from City of Clovis Municipal Code Section 5.27.604 that ensures that construction activities are performed within specific hours. Mitigation Measure 3.11-4 provides specific requirements for attenuating noise during construction. With implementation of the Mitigation Measure 3.11-3 and 3.11-4, the potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.
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.
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. (Less than Significant)
To predict existing and cumulative noise levels due to traffic, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used. The modeling is theoretical and does not take into account any existing barriers, structures, and/or topographical features that may further reduce noise levels. Therefore, the levels are shown for comparative purposes only to show the difference between with and without project conditions. In addition, the noise contours for 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL were calculated. The potential off-site noise impacts caused by an increase of traffic from operation of the proposed Project on the nearby roadways were calculated for existing, existing plus Project, cumulative 2046, and cumulative 2046 plus project scenarios.
Table 3.11-9 and 3.11-10 compare the without and with project scenario and shows the change in traffic noise levels as a result of the proposed Project. It takes a change of 3 dB or more to hear a perceptible difference
656
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.11-21 TABLE 3.11-10: 2046 SCENARIO - NOISE LEVELS ALONG ROADWAYS (DBA CNEL)
ROADWAY SEGMENT
EXISTING EXISTING WITH PROJECT
CNEL @ 50' DBA CNEL @ 50' DBA CHANGE IN NOISE
LEVEL
Behymer Avenue Willow Avenue to
Minnewawa Avenue 66.4 66.4 0.0
Behymer Avenue Minnewawa Avenue to
Sunnyside Avenue 67.0 67.0 0.0
Behymer Avenue Sunnyside Avenue to
Fowler Avenue 63.3 63.4 0.1
Shepherd Avenue Willow Avenue to
Minnewawa Avenue 71.9 72.1 0.2
Shepherd Avenue Minnewawa Avenue to
Clovis Avenue 71.2 71.6 0.4
Shepherd Avenue Clovis Avenue to
Sunnyside Avenue 70.8 71.5 0.7
Shepherd Avenue Sunnyside Avenue to
Project Intersection
(Fordham Avenue) 3
69.0 69.8 0.8
Shepherd Avenue Project Intersection
(Fordham Avenue) 3 to
Fowler Avenue
69.0 69.3 0.3
Herndon Avenue State Route 168
Eastbound Ramps to
Clovis Avenue
70.5 70.6 0.1
Willow Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Shepherd Avenue 76.3 76.3 0.1
Minnewawa Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Shepherd Avenue 68.6 68.6 0.0
Clovis Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 69.9 70.2 0.3
Clovis Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 69.9 70.2 0.3
Clovis Avenue Nees Avenue to Alluvial
Avenue 70.9 71.1 0.3
Clovis Avenue Alluvial Avenue to
Herndon Avenue 71.8 72.1 0.2
Sunnyside Avenue Project Intersection 1 to
Shepherd Avenue 68.7 69.2 0.5
Sunnyside Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 64.1 64.7 0.6
Sunnyside Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 63.9 64.5 0.6
Fowler Avenue Behymer Avenue to
Ticonderoga 64.3 64.3 0.0
Fowler Avenue Ticonderoga to Shepherd
Avenue 67.9 67.9 0.0
657
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
ROADWAY SEGMENT
EXISTING EXISTING WITH PROJECT
CNEL @ 50' DBA CNEL @ 50' DBA CHANGE IN NOISE
LEVEL
Fowler Avenue Shepherd Avenue to
Teague Avenue 68.4 68.7 0.3
Fowler Avenue Teague Avenue to Nees
Avenue 67.9 68.2 0.3
Fowler Avenue Nees Avenue to State
Route 168 Westbound
Ramps
71.4 71.6 0.1
SOURCE: FHWA-RD-77-108 WITH INPUTS FROM MD ACOUSTICS. 2023.
As shown in Table 3.11-10, the Cumulative 2046 scenario has a maximum change in noise level of
0.7 dBA CNEL. Sunnyside Avenue from Project Intersection 1 to Shepherd Avenue has a 0.5 dBA CNEL change. Future residential uses will be in the normally compatible level along that segment.
Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur with regard to this impact.
Impact 3.11-4: The proposed Project has the potential to generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. (Less than Significant)
The construction of the proposed Project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may be from a bulldozer or other earthmoving/grading equipment.
According to table 3.11-3, a large bulldozer has a vibration impact of 0.089 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible when close to the adjacent residential properties, but is below any threshold of risk to architectural damage when compared to table 3.11-
4. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur within regard to this impact.
Impact 3.11-5: For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. (No Impact)
The Project site is outside the Fresno Yosemite International Airport Contours. There are no private airstrips, public airports, or public use airports within two miles of the Project site. Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the proposed Project.
658
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-1 This section describes and evaluates potential impacts associated with the provision of police protection, fire protection and emergency services, parks and recreation, schools, and other public facilities for the proposed Project. The information in this section is primarily derived from the:
• City of Clovis General Plan; and
• Clovis Master Service Plan Update (City of Clovis, 2014).
There were no comments received during the NOP scoping process related to this environmental topic.
3.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
CITY OF CLOVIS SERVICES
The City of Clovis receives funds for the provision of public services through development impact fees, property taxes, and general funds and grants. As land is developed within the City and annexed into the City of Clovis, these fees apply. The City of Clovis periodically reviews these fee structures to ensure that they provide adequate financing to cover the ongoing provision of City services, determine the correct level of adjustment required, and assure funding for needed infrastructure going forward. The City’s General Services Department is responsible for continual oversight to ensure that the fee structures are adequate.1
Police protection to the unincorporated areas is provided by the Fresno County Sheriff and California Highway Patrol. The City has a mutual aid assistance agreement with both agencies. Continued development and annexation will affect services, but the City has proposed future facilities to accommodate growth. The operations of the Police Department, now and as the City grows, will be funded through the General Fund, Community Facilities District (CFD) fund, and grants (2014 Update).
City of Clovis Police Department
Police protection services in the City of Clovis are provided by the Clovis Police Department (CPD).
The CPD operates out of its headquarters located at the Clovis Civic Center. As of 2021, the CPD has 102 sworn officers (CPD, 2021B). The department serves a community of 122,000 (CPD, 2021A).
Based on this data, the service ratio is approximately 0.82 police officers per 1,000 residents.
The department classifies calls for service as Priority 1, Priority 2 or Priority 3. Priority 1 calls are calls where a threat is posed to life or a crime of violence. Priority 2 calls are calls for service where there is an urgency or suspicious behavior. Priority 3 calls are calls for service where no emergency or serious problem is involved. As of 2021, the Department reached their service rating goal of over 90 percent, with an overall approval rating of 94.7 percent (CPD, 2021A). There was an increase in all Priority level calls from 2020 to 2021, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The top six incident types 1 It should be noted that fee laws do not allow any deficits in fees to be made up retroactively. 659
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North increased in 2021 from 2020: Assist, Check on Welfare, Alarm, Animal Complaint, Follow up, and Unwanted (CPD, 2021B).
ORGANIZATION
The Department is organized into four major divisions, which are composed of eight budgetary sections as shown below (City of Clovis, 2014).
Patrol Division
The Patrol Division is the most highly visible section of the Police Department and is overseen by a Police Captain. Uniformed Patrol, which includes traffic enforcement, a Gang Response Team, the Reserve Unit, and Community Service Officers respond to calls for service and represent the Police Department in their daily contact with the citizens of Clovis. The Patrol Division is also working with all City departments to enforce Muni-Code issues and resolve on-going issues with specific code enforcement. They also deal effectively and appropriately with the criminals they apprehend. The Police Chaplain Program assists the Department and victims of crime during traumatic events or at times of grief. The Patrol Division’s aggressive and pro-active approach toward eliminating criminal activity and protecting its citizens has helped create a safe community for the citizens of Clovis (City of Clovis, 2014).
Planning and Neighborhood Services
Two Police Corporals are assigned to this division and are actively involved in reviewing new construction within the City, oversee alcohol licensing and permits, oversee massage parlors, and practitioners and run the police response to special events in the City (City of Clovis, 2014).
Communications
The Communications section provides dispatch services for the Police Department and serves as the primary answering point for 9-1-1 calls made from within the City limits. They serve as a resource to police officers, providing automated information as necessary to officers in the field (City of Clovis, 2014).
Investigations
The Investigations section is responsible for follow-up on all felony cases and preparing the cases for submittal to the District Attorney’s Office. The section is divided into two main areas of responsibility: General Investigations and Narcotics. Computer Crime and Identity Theft cases are up significantly (200%) and are beginning to take a toll on other general investigators’ responsibilities. Narcotics Investigators continue to work with Patrol as a team targeting street level dealers and their suppliers. Narcotics Detectives also assist in vice cases and the Gang Response Unit (City of Clovis, 2014).
Youth Services
The Youth Services unit is charged with providing services to prevent youth from drugs and alcohol abuse and prevent repeat juvenile offenders. Youth Services supports parents to manage their children and to utilize other youth services providers. The Youth Services Division is also responsible for graffiti removal throughout the City (City of Clovis, 2014). 660
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-3 Support Services
The Support Services unit encompasses diverse duties that focus on providing outstanding service to its customers and the citizens of Clovis. Division sections and functions include Communications/Dispatch, citizen and business services, fleet management, technology, department personnel training, department equipment and supplies management, and Records and Property (City of Clovis, 2014).
Administrative Services
The Administrative Services Division is the office of Chief of Police, which provides leadership and general direction and oversight for the entire department. The Administrative Services Division is responsible for several functions including administrative support to the Chief, special projects, research, internal audits and compliance, Homeland Security, grant administration, public information officer duties, employee injury, and oversight of workers’ compensation issues. The office support staff also performs a variety of personnel functions regarding recruitment and hiring and also provides support for other division commanders (City of Clovis, 2014).
Animal Shelter
The Animal Services Division is responsible for responding to calls for service in the community, investigating cruelty to animal cases, operating the Adoption Center and stray animal facility. The Animal Services Division works closely with Clovis veterinarians to achieve the primary goal of increasing the pet adoption rate, and educating the public on the importance of reducing the pet population through spaying and neutering (City of Clovis, 2014).
TABLE 3.12-1: CLOVIS CRIME STATISTICS (2017-2019)
CATEGORY/CRIME 2017 2018 2019
Population 108,419 111,759 114,170
Total Violent Crimes 243 221 243
Homicide 0 1 0
Rape 44 46 54
Robbery 61 36 32
Assault 138 138 157
Total Property Crimes 2,895 2,438 2,276
Burglary 453 358 307
Larceny Theft 2,234 1,932 1,810
Motor Vehicle Theft 208 148 159
Arson 8 6 6
SOURCE: FBI CRIME STATISTICS; TABLE 8, YEARS 2017, 2018, 2019, ACCESSED HTTPS://UCR.FBI.GOV/.
As shown in the table, the majority of crimes committed in Clovis consist of property crimes, primarily larceny.
City of Clovis Fire Department
The Clovis Fire Department (CFD) is responsible for providing Fire Suppression, Technical Rescue, Hazardous Materials Spill/Release Mitigation, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Life Safety and Enforcement Services and Emergency Preparedness for the citizens of Clovis. This responsibility includes the following functions: fire protection; emergency medical services; urban search and rescue; high angle, trench, water and confined space rescue; hazardous condition mitigation; 661
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North strategic planning; administration; fire cause and origin investigations; code enforcement; public education; emergency preparedness; disaster response and coordination. These responsibilities are distributed through two bureaus and eight divisions (City of Clovis, 2022A).
As of 2022, there are 67 well-trained and highly skilled professional firefighters, fire engineers, fire officers, chief officers, fire inspectors, and administrative staff. Together, emergency services are provided to approximately 120,124 residents with 26 square miles in the City’s first due response area. In September of 2021, the CFD placed two new fire engines in-service to replace fire engines which were over 15 years old and in October, an additional three personnel were hired to fill vacancies. The CFD added a second Training Captain to the Training Division to provide support to the 13 newly hired firefighters. (CFD, 2021).
The CFD maintains response time goals for various types of calls. The CFD received a total of 12,244 calls in 2022 (CFD, 2022). Table 3.12-2 presents CFD response time goals, and actual response times from 2021. As shown in Table 3.12-2, the Department did not meet its goal times for any type of call.
TABLE 3.12-2: 90TH PERCENTILE RESPONSE GOALS AND RESPONSE TIME PERFORMANCE
RESPONSE GOAL GOAL RESPONSE TIME ACTUAL RESPONSE TIME
FIRST UNIT ARRIVAL, TOTAL RESPONSE TIME:
EMS 6 Minutes, 30 seconds 7 Minutes, 35 seconds
MVA/Rescue 7 Minutes 7 Minutes, 31 seconds
Fire 7 Minutes 7 Minutes, 43 seconds
EFFECTIVE RESPONSE FORCE (DAILY STAFFING OF 19):
Fire 10 Minutes, 30 seconds 11 Minutes, 54 seconds
TURNOUT TIME FOR ALL PRIORITY RESPONSES: 1 Minute, 30 seconds 1 Minute, 36 seconds SOURCE: CFD 2022 ANNUAL REPORT
ISO RATING
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification Program currently rates the CFD as a 2 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the highest possible protection rating and 10 being the lowest. The ISO rating measures individual fire protection agencies against a Fire Suppression Rating Schedule, which includes such criteria as facilities and support for handling and dispatching fire alarms, first-alarm response and initial attack, and adequacy of local water supply for firesuppression purposes. The ISO ratings are used to establish fire insurance premiums (City of Clovis, 2022A).
FIRE STATIONS
There are currently six stations in operational use: Stations 1 through 6. In July 2021, hiring took place which made it possible to add the sixth fire company in service. Station 6 serves nearly 25,000 residents in the neighborhoods east of Temperance Avenue and south of Bullard Avenue; the new 662
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-5 station opened in September 2022.
2 The new station is strategically located to meet the needs of the growing Loma Vista Community. The CFD fire stations and locations are each listed below. • Station 1 – 633 Pollasky Avenue (operational)
• Station 2 – 2300 Minnewawa Avenue (operational)
• Station 3 – 555 North Villa Avenue (operational)
• Station 4 – 2427 Armstrong Avenue (operational)
• Station 5 – 790 North Temperance Avenue (operational) • Station 6 – 2388 Encino Avenue (operational) In addition, the CFD operates out of the Training Center, located at 3455 Lind Avenue, as well. (City of Clovis, 2022B).
City of Clovis Parks and Recreation Division
The General Services Department provides a range of services for residents and visitors, such as, Senior Services, Transit, and Clovis Recreation programs (City of Clovis, 2022C). The Parks Division falls under the direction of the Public Utilities Department and is overseen by a full time Parks Manager with a staff of approximately 20 employees. The goal of the Division is to maintain recreational facilities, streetscape, parks, trails, and other landscaped open space areas, City trees, and building grounds. (City of Clovis, 2018). The City of Clovis Recreation Section is responsible for operating the City of Clovis Batting Cages, Clovis Rotary Skatepark, Adult slow-pitch softball at Clovis Rotary Park, and the youth and adult programs at the Clovis Recreation Center (City of Clovis, 2022D).
The City of Clovis currently owns and maintains 81 parks, two of which are jointly maintained by a homeowners association (HOA) (i.e. Harlan Ranch,TR6200)). These parks range from passive (Dry Creek Trailhead and Cottonwood) to active (Rotary and Sierra Bicentennial), and are a mix of smaller pocket parks to larger basin parks. All parks are classified as either Pocket Park, Neighborhood Park, Area Park, Community Park, Regional Park, School Park, or Basin Park based on the parks standards outlined by the City. In addition to these facilities, Clovis maintains over 28.1 miles of trails. These trails are comprised of four primary trails (Clovis Old Town Trail, Dry Creek Trail, Enterprise Trail, and PG&E Trail) as well as a series of greenbelt paths in the northeast corner of the City and Paseos in the southeast (City of Clovis, 2018).
The Parks Division maintains approximately 452 total acres of City parks and landscaping; 81 parks totaling 173 acres; 263 acres of green belts, street gardens, trails, paseos, and landscaped median islands; 6 acres of building grounds; 12 acres of undeveloped park land and miscellaneous public right‐of‐way property; approximately 40,000 City street trees; and 28.1 existing miles of trails with 36 miles planned for the future (City of Clovis, 2018).
The Clovis General Plan establishes a goal of four acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which exceeds the requirement set forth by the Quimby Act. Based on the 2017 population of 110,762 2 See: https://www.clovisroundup.com/clovis-fire-station-6-opens-for-added-public-safety/ 663
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North residents and the park goals laid out by the General Plan, the City is working successfully toward meeting the park area goals. Currently, the City has 81 designated City parks that total approximately 173 acres. The goal for future planning increases the park area to approximately 380 acres and also substantially increases the number of trails (City of Clovis, 2018).
Types of Parks
POCKET PARKS
Pocket Parks are the smallest park classification at up to one acre in size. These parks are centrally located in residential neighborhoods and planned for families and children. Intended to offer a small open space/recreational venue of a more passive or intimate nature internal to a specified residential development. Typically, these parks provide picnic and sitting areas and should be accessible by foot or bicycle. Currently, the City has 1.58 acres of Pocket Parks made up of eight locations (City of Clovis, 2018).
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Typically, a neighborhood park ranges from one to two acres in size. These parks are uniquely tailored to the neighborhoods they serve and provide active recreation and a balance of amenities that appeal to a broad range of individuals. Currently, the City has 44.38 acres of Neighborhood Parks comprised of 50 parks. Three of these are HOA maintained (City of Clovis, 2018).
AREA PARKS
Area Parks function much like Neighborhood Parks, but are typically larger, ranging from 3 to 20 acres, and serve a larger population. These are intended to provide amenities for multiple age groups and connect to neighborhoods via trails or sidewalks. Currently, the City has 11 Neighborhood Parks totaling 41.99 acres (City of Clovis, 2018).
COMMUNITY PARKS
Community Parks are considerably larger in scale, ranging from 15 to 100 acres. The intent of these parks is to meet a wide range of community recreation and social needs focused on both passive and active recreation. The purpose of a community park is to bring people together to recreate, socialize, and find quiet space. Amenities may include those similar to a Neighborhood Park, as well as group picnic facilities, internal trails, and athletic facilities. Currently, the City has five Community Parks totaling 67.51 acres (City of Clovis, 2018).
REGIONAL PARKS
Regional Parks typically service multiple cities, cross political jurisdictions, and exceed 100 acres in size. The purpose of the parks is to preserve natural resources, remnant landscapes, and open space.
These parks can include passive activities, such as hiking and nature viewing, as well as active recreation areas, gardens, picnic facilities, and other special uses. There are currently no existing Regional Parks in the City of Clovis (City of Clovis, 2018). • Woodward Park is three miles west of the City’s western limits. This regional park is approximately 300 acres and includes amenities such as a multi‐use amphitheater, a 664
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-7 Japanese garden, **3fenced dog park, exercise par course, playgrounds, a lake, picnic areas, mountain bike courses, and miles of multipurpose trails that are part of the San Joaquin River Parkway’s Lewis S. Eaton Trail. There are six shelters located throughout the park. • Millerton Lake State Recreation Area is 6.6 miles north of the SOI beyond the non‐SOI Plan Area boundary. It spans over 6,800 acres of land; Millerton Lake (Reservoir) spans an additional 4,900 acres when full. The land portion of the recreation area is operated by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. Millerton Lake is managed by the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation. Recreational facilities include boat launch ramps, picnic areas, hiking trails, mountain biking trails, campgrounds, and boating campsites. • Lost Lake Recreation Area is a Fresno County facility on the San Joaquin River. It is 4.5 miles north of the SOI and includes a 38‐acre lake, campground, picnic area, softball field, volleyball courts, hiking trail, nature study area, playgrounds, and restrooms.
BASIN PARK
This classification pertains to Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control basins used in concert with, or in lieu of, other classes of parks to meet open space needs. These sites typically range from five to 20 acres and their uses are generally limited to dry periods due to their main priority as flood control facilities. Basin Parks offer connections to the larger community via trails or sidewalks. There are currently three Basin Parks totaling 21.13 acres (City of Clovis, 2018).
SCHOOL PARK
The School Park classification pertains to school sites used in concert with, or in lieu‐of, other classes of parks to meet open space needs. The City maintains an “open gate” policy for Clovis Unified School District (CUSD) land and facilities available for recreational use after normal school hours and during the summer. These sites are best suited for community‐based recreational programs and youth athletic facilities. Currently there are approximately 271 acres of CUSD Sites available for shared use.
The inventory of parks for the City of Clovis lists existing facilities found in every park. The parks are organized according to their classification type. Typical facilities within the Clovis Parks include, but are not limited to, playgrounds, benches, grill stations/BBQs, open lawns, and generous tree canopies. The data for the asset inventory was collected by Land Design and Green play, and this information was supplemented with GIS data from the City and additional site inventory visits (City of Clovis, 2018).
City Parks
City contains approximately 81 parks totaling 173 acres; 263 acres of green belts, street gardens, trails, paseos, and landscaped median islands; 6 acres of building grounds; 12 acres of undeveloped park land and miscellaneous public right‐of‐way property; approximately 40,000 City-street trees; 3 **Nearby Regional Recreation Areas. The following regional recreation areas are near the Clovis Plan Area and accessible to its residents and visitors. However, they are not part of the SOI Area or within the City limits. 665
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North and 28.1 existing miles of trails with 36 miles planned for the future. The Clovis General Plan establishes a goal of four acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Table 3.12-3 summarizes the City’s park facilities by category. Table 3.12-2 utilizes the 2022 population of the City, 123,665, to determine the current acreage ratio (DOF, 2022).
TABLE 3.12-3: SUMMARY OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
PARK TYPE NUMBER ACREAGE
CURRENT RATIO
(ACRES PER 1,000
RESIDENTS)
Pocket Parks 8 locations 1.58 0.013
Neighborhood Parks 50 parks 44.38 0.36
Area Parks 11 parks 41.99 0.34
Community Parks 5 parks 67.51 0.55
Regional Parks 3 sites* ~1,238 10.01
Basin Parks 3 parks 21.13 0.17
School Parks -- 271 2.19
TOTAL -- 1,685.6 --
SOURCE: CLOVIS PARKS MASTER PLAN, 2018
*SITES ARE NOT WITHIN CITY BORDER OR SOI BUT SERVICE CLOVIS POPULATIONS When the acreage is broken down into functional categories, it displays that the City currently does not meet park acreage standards for any category. While Regional Parks acreage surpasses the City’s goal of four acres per 1,000 residents, no Regional Parks are within the City of Clovis; Regional Parks typically service multiple cities across political jurisdictions (City of Clovis, 2018). Further, the City has a long‐standing joint use agreement with CUSD for use of school district recreational facilities by the public. Due to limited access, these facilities are calculated at half their acreage and facility quantities in the Level of Service (LOS) analysis.4 Thus, of the 271 acres of CUSD school playfields, approximately 135 acres are credited toward meeting the City’s parkland standard. (City of Clovis, 2018).
The City’s Parks Master Plan identifies additional facility needs required over the next five to ten years. The goal for future planning increases the park area to approximately 380 acres and also substantially increases the number of trails. This amount is approximate and could be met by a combination of utilizing existing undeveloped parkland and acquiring new parkland to develop (City of Clovis, 2018).
Typical facilities within the Clovis Parks include, but are not limited to, playgrounds, benches, grill stations/BBQs, open lawns, and generous tree canopies (City of Clovis, 2018). 4 Level of Service (LOS) standards and analysis is a commonly‐used method to examine how well a community’s park and recreation needs are being met through a comparison to standards of national, state, and comparable municipality; population size is an important factor for assessing park and recreational needs. 666
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-9
OTHER AGENCY SERVICES
Clovis Unified School District
The City of Clovis and its sphere of influence lies primarily within the CUSD. Only a small portion of the southwest area of the City lies in the Fresno Unified Scholl District (FUSD). A small portion of the southeast area of the proposed sphere of influence lies within the Sanger Unified School District (SUSD). These districts are affected by residential growth in the Clovis area. CUSD is managing the growth by financing new facilities through bonds, development fees, and state schools funding (City of Clovis, 2014).
The CUSD provides school services for grades TK through 12 throughout most of Clovis, 20 percent of Fresno and a small portion of unincorporated Fresno County. The CUSD is approximately 200 square miles and serves more than 42,000 students at 44 comprehensive schools. (CUSD, 2022A).
Table 3.12-4 provides the CUSD school inventory for K-6 grade schools, 7-8 grade schools, and 9-12 grade schools. Table 3.12-4 does not include the CUSD’s education service schools or programs.
TABLE 3.12-4: PUBLIC SCHOOLS SERVING CLOVIS
SCHOOL
GRADES
SERVED
ENROLLMENT
2021-2022
SCHOOL YEAR
ADDRESS
K-6 SCHOOLS
Virginia R. Boris Elementary K-6 632 7071 E Clinton Ave, Fresno,
Bud Rank Elementary K-6 677 3650 Powers Ave
Cedarwood Elementary K-6 762 2851 Palo Alto Ave
Century Elementary K-6 628 965 N Sunnyside Ave
Clovis Elementary K-6 651 1100 Armstrong Ave
Cole Elementary K-6 669 615 W Stuart Ave
Copper Hills Elementary K-6 593 1881 E Plymouth Way,
Fresno
Dry Creek Elementary K-6 921 1273 N Armstrong Ave
Fancher Creek Elementary K-6 680 5948 E Tulare Ave,
Fresno
Fort Washington Elementary K-6 575 960 E Teague Ave,
Fresno
Freedom Elementary K-6 712 2955 Gettysburg Ave
James S Fugman Elementary K-6 794 10825 N Cedar Ave,
Fresno
Garfield Elementary K-6 595 1315 N Peach Ave
Gettysburg Elementary K-6 663 2100 Gettysburg Ave
Jefferson Elementary K-6 610 1880 Fowler Ave
Liberty Elementary K-6 611 1250 E Liberty Hill Rd,
Fresno
Lincoln Elementary K-6 679 774 E Alluvial Ave,
Fresno
667
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North SCHOOL
GRADES
SERVED
ENROLLMENT
2021-2022
SCHOOL YEAR
ADDRESS
Maple Creek Elementary K-6 521 2025 E Teague Ave,
Fresno
Mickey Cox Elementary K-6 623 2191 Sierra Ave
Miramonte Elementary K-6 558 1590 Bellaire Ave
Mountain View Elementary K-6 567 2002 E Alluvial Ave
Nelson Elementary K-6 475 1336 W Spruce Ave,
Fresno
Roger S. Oraze Elementary K-6 820 3468 N Armstrong Ave, Fresno
Pinedale Elementary K-6 490 7171 North Sugarpine,
Fresno
Reagan Elementary K-6 682 3701 Ashlan Ave
Red Bank Elementary K-6 768 1454 N Locan Ave
Riverview Elementary K-6 655 2491 E Behymer Ave,
Fresno
Sierra Vista Elementary K-6 484 510 Barstow Ave
Tarpey Elementary K-6 658 2700 Minnewawa Ave
Temperance Kutner Elementary K-6 591 1448 N Armstrong Ave, Fresno
Valley Oak Elementary K-6 469 465 E Champlain Dr,
Fresno
Weldon Elementary K-6 575 150 Dewitt Ave
Woods Elementary K-6 688 700 Teague Ave
Janet L. Young Elementary K-6 639 3140 N Locan Ave,
Fresno
INTERMEDIATE SCHOOLS
Alta Sierra Intermediate 7-8 1304 380 W Teague Ave
Clark Intermediate 7-8 1495 902 5th St
Granite Ridge Intermediate 7-8 1122 2770 E International Ave, Fresno Kastner Intermediate 7-8 1141 7676 N First St, Fresno
Reyburn Intermediate 7-8 1516 2901 N De Wolf Ave
HIGH SCHOOLS
Buchanan High 9-12 2685 1560 N Minnewawa Ave
Clovis High 9-12 2928 1055 Fowler Ave
Clovis East High 9-12 2733 2940 Leonard Ave
Clovis North High 9-12 2442 2770 E International Ave, Fresno Clovis West High 9-12 2096 1070 E Teague Ave, Fresno
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 2021-22ENROLLMENT BY GRADE 668
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-11 As shown in Table 3.12-4, the schools serving the City had a total enrollment of approximately 41,177 students, of which 21,715 were enrolled in elementary (K-6), 6,578 were enrolled in intermediate school (grades 7-8) and 12,884 were enrolled in high school (grades 9 – 12).
District-wide CUSD Schools have a total enrollment of 42,699 students for the 2021-2022 school year. Table 3.12-5 provides a summary of the enrollment by grade within CUSD.
TABLE 3.12-5: ENROLLMENT BY GRADE CUSD (2021-2022)
CLOVIS
UNIFIED
GRADE LEVEL
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
TOTAL
2021-
2022
Total 3,287 2,946 3,074 3,074 3,159 3,245 3,287 3,287 3,415 3,501 3,458 3,287 3,586 42,699 % Total 7.7 6.9 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.6 7.7 7.7 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.7 8.4 100% SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 2021-22 ENROLLMENT BY GRADE.
The CUSD’s school building capacity was determined to be 21,916 for grades TK-6, 6,561 for grades 7-8, and 12,135 for grades 9-12. The CUSD does not have existing capacity to accommodate projected students from new development. Therefore, the CUSD will need additional school facilities during the next five years for approximately 2,339 students in grades TK-6, 496 students in grades 7-8, and 1,034 students in grades 9-12 (Odell Planning, 2022).
The CUSD adopted Level I and II School Facilities (Developer) Fees in June 2022. Developer Fees are utilized to enhance and maintain existing facilities; they are also put towards construction and expansion of new facilities (CUSD, 2022B).
The City of Clovis has a unique partnership with the school districts, in which the schools provide and operate most recreation programs for the youth and teens of the community. While the schools do provide programming, the City of Clovis also operates youth and adult programs through the Clovis Recreation Center and additional programing and events for the community (City of Clovis, 2018).
Library Services
Library services are provided by Fresno County and funded by the County General Fund and countywide sales tax override. A branch library is located in the Clovis Civic Center (1155 Fifth Street). New library facilities are proposed for inclusion in each of the Urban Villages outlined in the 1993 General Plan Update (City of Clovis, 2014).
The Fresno County Public Library provides collections and services through its Central Resource Library and 34 branches. It is part of the San Joaquin Valley Library System (SJVLS), a cooperative network of 10 public library jurisdictions in the counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced and Tulare (FCPL, 2022A).
669
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North The Clovis branch is 8,627 square feet and is open to the public seven days a week; from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Mondays through Thursdays, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Fridays and Saturdays, and 12:00 PM to 5 PM on Sundays. The Clovis branch has ten laptops available for checkout and other technologic tools available to the public. The library offers black & white and color printing, as well as a photocopier and a recycling drop-off bin (FCPL, 2022B).
Clovis Senior Center
The Community Services Division administers various senior citizen programs at the Clovis Senior Center. The Clovis Senior Center is open to anyone age 50 or older and is located at 850 Fourth Street between the Clovis Veterans Memorial District Building and the San Joaquin Valley College of Law. Clovis Senior Services sponsors a wide range of classes, programs, and activities to promote healthy and independent living for individuals 50 years and older. No membership fee is required, although some classes and sessions have a small activity fee and/or registration fee (City of Clovis, 2022E).
Clovis Health Care Facilities.
Health care facilities within Clovis encompass Community Health Systems, Kaiser Permanente Clovis Medical Offices, residential care facilities, as well as private physicians and other medical practitioners.
Community Health System is a locally owned, not-for-profit, public-benefit organization based in Fresno, California. Four acute-care hospitals– Community Regional Medical Center, Clovis Community Medical Center, Fresno Heart & Surgical Hospital and Community Behavioral Health Center-, a cancer institute along with several long-term care, outpatient and other healthcare facilities are in operation. The Clovis Community Center is located on the northeast corner of Herndon and Temperance Avenues. The Clovis Community Medical Center houses 208 licensed beds, and has plans to add 144 more in 2022, bringing the total number of private rooms from 208 to 352 (Community Health System, 2022).
3.12.2 REGULATORY SETTING
STATE
Police Protection
There are no federal or state regulations related to police protection services applicable to the proposed Project.
Fire Protection and Emergency Response
CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8 Sections 1270 "Fire Prevention" and 6773 "Fire Protection and Fire Equipment" the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical 670
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-13 services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE/EVACUATION PLANS
The State passed legislation authorizing the Office of Emergency Services (OES) to prepare a Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non-compliance with SEMS could result in the State withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.
CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
The 2019 California Fire Code contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises. The Fire Code contains specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety.
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code.
This includes regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.
NFPA 1710
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710 Standards are applicable to urban areas and where staffing is comprised of career firefighters. According to these guidelines, a career fire department needs to respond within six minutes, 90 percent of the time with a response time measured from the 911 call to the time of arrival of the first responder.
The standards are divided as follows:
• Dispatch time of one minute or less for at least 90 percent of the alarms; • Turnout time of one minute or less for EMS calls (80 seconds for fire and special operations response);
• Fire response travel time of four minutes or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire incident and eight minutes or less travel time for the deployment of an initial full alarm assignment at a fire incident;
• Eight minutes or less travel time for the arrival of an advanced life support (ALS) (4 minutes or less if provided by the fire department.
671
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Parks/Recreation
QUIMBY ACT
The Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477) states that “the legislative body of a city or county may, by ordinance, require the dedication of land or impose a requirement of the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative or parcel map.” Requirements of the Quimby Act apply only to the acquisition of new parkland and do not apply to the physical development of new park facilities or associated operations and maintenance costs. The Quimby Act seeks to preserve open space needed to develop parkland and recreational facilities; however, the actual development of parks and other recreational facilities is subject to discretionary approval and is evaluated on a caseby-case basis with new residential development. The City collects impact fees at the time of building permits and final maps that include both capital impacts and land acquisition.
Schools
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
The California Code of Regulations, Chapter 4.9, Payment of Fees, Charges, Dedications, or Other Requirements Against a Development Project. Section 65995-65998 (h) The payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement levied or imposed pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code in the amount specified in Section 65995 and, if applicable, any amounts specified in Section 65995.5 or 65995.7 are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as defined in Section 56021 or 56073, on the provision of adequate school facilities.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The California Department of Education (CDE) School Facilities Planning Division (SFPD) prepared a School Site Selection and Approval Guide that provides criteria for locating appropriate school sites in the State of California. School site and size recommendations were changed by the CDE in 2000 to reflect various changes in educational conditions, such as lowering of class sizes and use of advanced technology. The expanded use of school buildings and grounds for community and agency joint use and concern for the safety of the students and staff members also influenced the modification of the CDE recommendations.
Specific recommendations for school size are provided in the School Site Analysis and Development Guide. This document suggests a ratio of 1:2 between buildings and land. CDE is aware that in a number of cases, primarily in urban settings, smaller sites cannot accommodate this ratio. In such cases, the SFPD may approve an amount of acreage less than the recommended gross site size and building-to-ground ratio.
Certain health and safety requirements for school site selection are governed by state regulations and the policies of the SFPD relating to:
• Proximity to airports, high-voltage power transmission lines, railroads, and major roadways; 672
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-15 • Presence of toxic and hazardous substances;
• Hazardous facilities and hazardous air emissions within one-quarter mile; • Proximity to high-pressure natural gas lines, propane storage facilities, gasoline lines, pressurized sewer lines, or high-pressure water pipelines; • Noise;
• Results of geological studies or soil analyses; and
• Traffic and school bus safety issues.
THE KINDERGARTEN-COMMUNITY COLLEGE PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2016 (PROP 51)
The Kindergarten-Community College Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2016 was the first education-related bond measure to appear on the ballot since 2006. This act was approved by California voters in November 2016 and provided for a bond issued of $9 billion with $7.0 billion earmarked for K-12 school facilities and $2 billion earmarked for community college facilities. The $7.0 billion for K-12 school facilities was allocated as follows: $3 billion for the construction of new school facilities, $500 million for providing school facilities for charter schools, $3 billion for the modernization of school facilities, and $500 million for providing facilities for career technical education programs. The $2 billion allocated to community college facilities was for acquiring, constructing, renovating, and equipping community college facilities.
LEROY F. GREENE SCHOOL FACILITIES ACT OF 1998 (SB 50)
The “Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998,” also known as Senate Bill 50 or SB 50 (Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998), governs a school district’s authority to levy school impact fees. This comprehensive legislation, together with the $9.2 billion education bond act approved by the voters in November 1998 known as “Proposition 1A,” reformed methods of school construction financing in California. SB 50 instituted a new school facility program by which school districts can apply for state construction and modernization funds. It imposed limitations on the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities impacts as a condition of approving new development and provided the authority for school districts to levy fees at three different levels:
• Level I fees are the current statutory fees allowed under Education Code 17620. This code section provides the basic authority for school districts to levy a fee against residential and commercial construction for the purpose of funding school construction or reconstruction of facilities. These fees vary by district for residential construction and commercial construction and are increased biannually.
• Level II fees are outlined in Government Code Section 65995.5, allowing school districts to impose a higher fee on residential construction if certain conditions are met. These conditions include having a substantial percentage of students on multi-track year-round scheduling, having an assumed debt equal to 15–30 percent of the district’s bonding capacity (percentage is based on revenue sources for repayment), having at least 20 percent of the district’s teaching stations housed in relocatable classrooms, and having placed a local bond on the ballot in the past four years which received at least 50 percent plus one of the 673
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North votes cast. A Facility Needs Assessment must demonstrate the need for new school facilities for unhoused pupils is attributable to projected enrollment growth from the construction of new residential units over the next five years.
Level III fees are outlined in Government Code Section 655995.7. If State funding becomes unavailable, this code section authorizes a school district that has been approved to collect Level II fees to collect a higher fee on residential construction. This fee is equal to twice the amount of Level II fees. However, if a district eventually receives State funding, this excess fee may be reimbursed to the developers or subtracted from the amount of state funding.
LOCAL
City of Clovis Municipal Code
Municipal Code Chapter 3.4, Park Acquisition and Development, establishes a method for coordinated acquisition and development of City park facilities. This Chapter states that any residential projects shall pay parks acquisition and development fees per dwelling unit.
Title 4 of the City Municipal Code is dedicated to Public Safety. The purposes of Chapter 4.2, Emergency Services, are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within the City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the Emergency Organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of the City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons. Chapters 4.3 and 4.4 pertain to Fire Department and Fire Prevention; Chapter 4.4 codifies the adoption of the California Fire Code.
Chapter 4.10, Fire Facility Development Impact Fee, claims that any owner/developer who constructs or causes a dwelling unit or a “dwelling unit equivalent” to be constructed in the City shall pay a fire department fee in addition to any other fees required to be paid by the City. Chapter 4.11, Police Department Fee, mirrors Chapter 4.10 in that this Chapter requires the payment of a fee for a specific public service, in the case of Chapter 4.11, the fee goes towards police facilities.
The purpose of Chapter 7.8, Library Facilities Development Impact Fees, is to create and establish a library facilities development impact fee (“library fee”) for the City, which shall be used to mitigate adverse impacts to public library facilities and equipment attributed to new development. The library fee shall be used by the City to pay a portion of the costs of designated library facilities and equipment impacted by new development. The library fee shall be based on a method designed to ensure that developers pay their fair share of the cost of such library facilities and equipment required to serve the City’s growing population.
Section 9.22.060, Fire protection, is under Chapter 9.22, Performance Standards. Section 9.22.060 explains that all new or modified development shall be built per the currently adopted California Fire Code, related Municipal Code provisions, and current Clovis Fire Code standards and policies.
Title 10 is dedicated to Parks and Recreation. This title regulates street trees and plants (Chapter
10.1); use of City parks and other City public facilities (Chapter 10.2); prohibited acts (Chapter 10.3); violations (Chapter 10.4); and skate park facilities (Chapter10.5). 674
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-17 Clovis Parks Master Plan (2018)
The City of Clovis Parks Master Plan provides strategic guidance in the provision of parks services to best develop, promote, utilize, manage, and maintain a functional park system for the City of Clovis.
The master plan will guide policy development, prioritize demands and opportunities, and generate a strategic action plan for the next 5 to 10 years. The Plan addresses current and aging areas of the City park system, as well as future growth of the City and identifies opportunities that will expand and complement the City Parks Division and address the needs of the community.
City of Clovis General Plan
The General Plan includes several policies relevant to public services. It is noted that the currently adopted General Plan is the City of Clovis General Plan, adopted in August 2014; policies applicable to the Project are identified below:
Land Use Element
• Policy 6.1 Amendment criteria. The City Council may approve amendments to the General Plan when the City Council is satisfied that the following conditions are met:
A. The proposed change is and will be fiscally neutral or positive.
B. The proposed change can be adequately served by public facilities and would not negatively impact service on existing development or the ability to service future development.
C. The proposed change is consistent with the Urban Village Neighborhood Concept when within an Urban Center.
D. General Plan amendments proposing a change from industrial, mixed-use business campus, or office (employment generating) land use designations to nonemployment-generating land use designation shall be accompanied by an analysis of the potential impacts on the City’s current and long-term jobs-housing ratio, as well as an evaluation on the change or loss in the types of jobs.
E. This policy does not apply to:
i. County designations within the Clovis Planning Area or changes made by the City Council outside of the sphere boundary to reflect changes made by the County of Fresno.
ii. Changes initiated by public agencies (such as school districts, flood control) for use by public agencies.
iii. Changes initiated by the city within a specific plan.
Circulation Element
• Policy 1.3 Age and mobility. The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities. • Policy 1.5 Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood-serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).
675
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Public Facilities and Services Element
• Policy 1.1 New development. New development shall pay its fair share of public facility and infrastructure improvements.
• Policy 1.4 Development-funded facilities. The City may require developments to install onsite or offsite facilities that are in excess of a development’s fair share. However, the City shall establish a funding mechanism for future development to reimburse the original development for the amount in excess of the fair share costs. • Policy 3.4 Joint use of facilities. Partner with public and private educational institutions to jointly use facilities for both civic and educational purposes. • Policy 4.3 Lifelong learning. Enhance and expand Clovis’ library facilities to meet the evolving educational and lifelong learning needs of the community. Coordinate with local educational institutions to offer courses and learning opportunities outside the classroom. • Policy 4.4 Recreation programs. Provide and/or sponsor recreational programs and services that are accessible and affordable to residents of all ages and abilities and encourage active and healthy living.
• Policy 4.5 Youth programs. Coordinate with public and private schools, local nonprofits, service clubs, and other agencies to provide opportunities for youth to explore and enjoy sports, creative and performing arts, future career paths, civic activities, and volunteer opportunities.
• Policy 4.6 Senior programs. Collaborate with service providers to provide a wide variety of senior services and programs, including daily opportunities for seniors to have physical activity, social interaction, and mental stimulation.
• Policy 4.7 Childcare and childhood development. Encourage efforts to expand the overall capacity of and access to local childcare and early childhood development centers. • Policy 4.8 Access to community facilities. Improve transit connections to community facilities for people who are transit-dependent.
• Policy 5.9 Proximity to emergency medical services. Require senior care facilities and other services providers that may need frequent emergency medical services to locate in proximity to fire stations and medical service providers. • Policy 6.1 Fire and police service. Maintain staffing, facilities, and training activities to effectively respond to emergency and general public service calls. • Policy 6.2 Resource allocation. Periodically conduct service level studies to analyze crime and emergency service performance data, to evaluate the effectiveness of prevention and reduction strategies, and to allocate resources accordingly. • Policy 6.3 Emergency medical calls. Explore options to lessen the demand on fire and police services or expand reimbursement programs to ensure the service pays for measured impacts.
• Policy 6.4 Skilled medical facilities. Consider options to offset or apportion the higher cost of providing emergency medical service to facilities with existing skilled medical personnel on staff.
676
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-19 • Policy 6.5 Public safety hot spots. Prioritize improvement and enforcement activities to minimize existing and prevent future public safety hot spots. Reevaluate siting and development standards for facilities that generate high demands for service calls. • Policy 6.6 Interagency support. Participate in mutual aid system and automatic aid agreements to back up and supplement capabilities to respond to emergencies. • Policy 6.7 Interagency communications. Maintain an effective communication system between emergency service providers within Clovis and neighboring jurisdictions. • Policy 6.8 Emergency preparedness planning. Maintain an emergency operations plan, an emergency operations center, and a hazard mitigation plan to prepare for actual or threatened conditions of disaster or extreme peril.
• Policy 6.9 Community outreach. Conduct outreach in the community to promote personal and public safety in daily life and in cases of emergency. Regularly update and inform the public on the real levels of crime and safety to strengthen their perceived sense of personal security.
Environmental Safety Element
• 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.
• Policy 1.6 Public information and emergency preparedness. Provide the public with accurate and reliable information regarding natural hazards to prevent and mitigate potential risks and exposure for life and property. Continue to maintain a local hazard mitigation plan and conduct programs to inform the general public of the City’s emergency preparedness and disaster response procedures.
Open Space and Conservation Element
• Policy 1.1 Parkland standard. Provide a minimum of 4 acres of public parkland for every 1,000 residents.
• Policy 1.2 Existing parks. Upgrade and rehabilitate existing parks as necessary to meet the needs of the community and as the financial resources of the city allow. • Policy 1.3 New parks and recreation facilities. Provide a variety of parks and recreation facilities in underserved and growing areas of the community. • Policy 1.4 Joint use of education facilities. Provide a balanced system of parks and recreation facilities through joint use of facilities owned by school districts. • 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. • Policy 1.7 Sustainability. Develop new and maintain existing parks and recreation facilities to achieve fiscal and environmental sustainability.
• Policy 1.8 Funding. Require new development to provide pocket and neighborhood parks, dedicate land for area parks, and pay impact fees for community and regional parks. Require 677
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North new development to establish lighting and landscape maintenance districts to fund operations and maintenance.
• Policy 1.9 Master plan. Periodically update the Parks Master Plan to direct the implementation of the city’s open space facilities.
3.12.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project will have a significant impact on public services if it would result in:
• Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
o Fire Protection;
o Police Protection;
o Schools;
o Parks; and
o Other public facilities.
• An increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or
• If it includes recreational facilities or requires the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
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. (Less than Significant) The proposed Project would introduce new residential uses and residents to the City. The Project proposes 605 single-family units be developed. This will create an increased demand for police protection services compared to existing conditions. The City’s Existing General Plan designates the Development Area as Rural Residential (RR) and therefore, anticipated potential development in and around the area. To the extent that the Project would have an incremental increase in demand on police protection services provided by the CPD, the Project would be required to pay the police facility fee in accordance with Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 4.11, Police Department Fees. The fee is imposed on residential development within the City for the purposes of assuring that the current 678
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-21 level of service goals of the City are met with respect to additional demands placed on police facilities from such development.
According to the most recent Department of Finance (2022) estimates, the Clovis population is 123,665 and the average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit is 2.81; therefore, the Project is estimated to increase the population by 1,700 residents (based on 2.81 persons per household).
As of 2021, the CPD has 102 sworn officers (CPD, 2021B). With the addition of 1,700 residents, that equates to a staffing level of approximately 0.81 officers per 1,000 residents. This is not a significant change from the current service ratio of 0.82 officers per 1,000 residents. The City has anticipated additional officers would be hired as the City population grows. The City and CPD periodically monitor response times and reports annually on the results to ensure adequate police protection service levels are provided.
Impact fees from new development are collected based upon projected impacts from each development. The adequacy of impact fees is reviewed periodically to ensure that the fee is commensurate with the service. Payment of the applicable impact fees by the Project applicant, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by the proposed Project, would fund capital and labor costs associated with police services.
The Project does not propose and would not create a need for new or physically altered police protection facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Therefore, the Project would not result in adverse physical impacts associated with such facilities. The Project would be required to pay the City’s development fee specific to police, which in accordance with the Clovis Municipal Code, shall be used solely and exclusively for the purpose of funding police station improvements. Payment of the fee would offset the incremental increase in demand for police protection services associated with the Project. In addition, the Development Area would be required to annex into the City of Clovis Public Safety Community Facilities District.
Based on the ability of the CPD to serve the City, it is anticipated that the existing police department facilities are sufficient to serve the proposed Project and the construction of new or expanded police department facilities would not be required. Consequently, any impacts would be less than significant.
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. (Less than Significant) The CFD will be the responding agency to fires and emergencies at the Project site. For low-risk fires, three CFD personnel will respond; moderate risk structure fires will have a response of 16 CFD personnel, and high risk structure fires will have a response of 19 CFD personnel. Three personnel will respond to all low and moderate risk EMS incidents. Low and moderate risk technical rescue and hazardous materials (HazMat) incidents will receive three personnel; ten personnel will respond to high-risk technical rescue and HazMat incidents (CFD, 2017). Average response times for the CFD 679
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North are presented in Table 3.12-2. As shown in Table 3.12-2, as of 2021, the CFD did not meet or exceed its response-time goals, as it has in past years. While the CFD has not met response time goals as of 2021, the Department has recently opened a new station (Station 6) for commission. Station 6 opened in August of 2022, and allows the CFD to serve more people within their jurisdiction at a faster rate (CFD, 2021).
The proposed Project would introduce new residential uses to the City (i.e. 605 single-family residences). This would create an increased demand for fire services compared to existing conditions. The City’s Existing General Plan designates the Development Area as Rural Residential (RR) and therefore, anticipated potential development. Although a General Plan Amendment would be required as part of the proposed Project, to the extent that the Project would have an incremental increase in demand on fire services provided by the CFD, the Project would be required to pay the community facility fee in accordance with Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 4.10, Fire Facility Development Impact Fee. The fee is imposed on residential development within the City for the purposes of assuring that the current level of service goals of the City are met with respect to additional demands placed on fire facilities from such development.
The Project does not propose and would not create a need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Development fees from new development are collected based upon projected impacts from each development. The adequacy of impact fees is reviewed periodically to ensure that the fee is commensurate with the service. In addition, the Project Site would be required to annex into the city of Clovis Public Safety Community Facilities District. Payment of the applicable impact fees by the Project applicant, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by the proposed Project, would fund capital and labor costs associated with fire protection services. Therefore, the impact of the proposed Project on the need for additional fire services facilities is less than significant and would not require the construction of additional fire department facilities.
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. (Less than Significant) The proposed Project is located within the service boundaries of the CUSD. Specifically, the Project site is nearest to Woods Elementary, approximately one mile southwest of the Project site, and Buchanan High School, approximately 1.7 miles southwest of the Project site.
The proposed Project would provide up to 605 residential units, which would directly cause population growth, including school-aged children that would attend the schools that serve the Project site and surrounding area. Utilizing the student generation rates provided by the CUSD in the Development Fee Justification Study/School Facilities Needs Analysis (dated April 2022), the 680
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-23 proposed Project would be expected to generate roughly 342 new students5, broken down by grades as follows:
• TK–6: 205 students
• 7-8: 48 students
• 9-12: 90 students
Students within the Project site would most likely attend Woods Elementary and Buchanan High School, as they are the closest educational locations to the Project site. However, student placement is subject to CUSD’s determination.
The CUSD’s school building capacity was determined to be 21,916 for grades TK-6, 6,561 for grades 7-8, and 12,135 for grades 9-12. The CUSD does not have existing capacity to accommodate projected students from new development. Therefore, the CUSD will need additional school facilities during the next five years for approximately 2,339 students in grades TK-6, 496 students in grades 7-8, and 1,034 students in grades 9-12. The CUSD currently owns four elementary school sites (Fowler-McKinley, Minnewawa-Perrin, Minnewawa-International, and an elementary site in the Millerton Specific Plan Area) as well as the Bradley Educational Center site, which would accommodate a future high school, intermediate school, and elementary school. The CUSD, therefore, has school site capacity for all projected students in all grade levels, and thus no site acquisition costs are needed. (Odell, 2022).
School districts are authorized to collect fees on new residential and commercial/industrial development in accordance with Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995. This Development Fee Justification Study/School Facilities Needs Analysis provides the information and analysis necessary to demonstrate that the CUSD is justified in collecting Level I fees on new residential and commercial/industrial development ($4.79 and $0.78 per square foot, respectively), and Level II and Level III fees of $5.36 per square foot and $10.73 per square foot for residential development, respectively. (Odell, 2022). The CUSD adopted Level I and II School Facilities (Developer) Fees in June 2022 (CUSD, 2022B). The development fees collected by the CUSD may be used for construction and reconstruction of school facilities, site development, relocatable classrooms on existing or future sites and other facilities necessitated by students generated by new development (Odell, 2022).
Payment of the applicable impact fees by the Project applicant, and ongoing revenues that would come from taxes, would fund capital and labor costs associated with school services. The adequacy 5 Calculations based on the CUSD Development Fee Justification Study/School Facilities Needs Analysis (2022), which states that Single family residential development generates an average of 0.3395 students grades TK-6;
0.0793 students for grades 7-8; and 0.1473 students for grades 9-12 per unit. 681
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North of fees is reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that the fee is commensurate with the service.
Payment of the applicable impact fees by the Project applicant, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by the proposed Project, would fund improvements associated with school services. According to Government Code Section 65996, the development fees authorized by SB 50 (1998) are deemed to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation” for any demands or impacts on school facilities caused by new development Therefore, the impact of the proposed Project on the need for additional school facilities is less than significant.
Impact 3.12-4: The proposed Project has the potential to have effects on other public facilities. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Project will bring residents to the area which may require the use of other public services such as libraries, civic centers, etc. Public services such as the Clovis branch of the Fresno County Public Library and the Clovis Senior Center would serve Project residents. The City collects impact fees from new development based upon projected impacts from each development, including impacts on other public services as required by Chapter 3.10, Development Impact Fees and Chapter 7.8, Library Facilities Development Impact Fees of the City’s Municipal Code. The City reviews the adequacy of impact fees on an annual basisto ensure that the fee is commensurate with services provided. Payment of the applicable impact fees by the Project applicant, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by the proposed Project, would fund capital and labor costs associated with these other public services.
The proposed Project does not trigger the need for new facilities associated with other public services. Consequently, new facilities for other public services are not proposed at this time. The proposed Project would not result in the need for new facilities for other public services, thus it will have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
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. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Project directly increases the number of persons in the area as a result of new residential development. The proposed Project provides 605 single-family residential units.
According to the most recent Department of Finance (2022) estimates, the average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit in the City of Clovis is 2.81; therefore, the Project is estimated to increase the population by 1,700 residents (based on 2.81 persons per household).
The City’s General Plan identifies a park standard based on a goal of four acres of parkland per 1,000 residents within the City limits. The Project proposes to include open space totaling approximately
5.54 acres on-site, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and
0.90 acres of parks, which would not provide the park land needed to meet the four acres per 1,000 682
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.12-25 people. However, Municipal Code Chapter 3.4, Park Acquisition and Development, states that any developer who plans for dwelling units to be constructed in the City shall pay, in addition to any other fees required to be paid by the City, a fee which shall be calculated on the basis of park acreage designated in the Clovis General Plan consisting of the estimated total land acquisition and construction cost distributed on the basis of the remaining developable area within the sphere of influence. In accordance with the Municipal Code, fees are deposited in specific funds that shall be used solely for the acquisition, improvement and expansion of public parks and recreation facilities as outlined in the park acquisition and improvement fee update. Thus, upon provision and dedication of the proposed parkland and/or payment of required fees in accordance with the Clovis Municipal Code Chapter 3.04, and other Municipal Code policies, the proposed Project will result in a less than significant impact.
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. (Less than Significant)
As stated previously, the proposed Project will directly increase the number of persons in the area through the addition of 605 new residential units. The Project also provides open space on-site, totaling 5.54 acres, including 2.25 acres of trails, 2.39 acres of promenade/pedestrian circulation, and 0.90 acres of parks, and will pay park impact fees according to Municipal Code Chapters 3.04 and 3.10. It is not anticipated that the proposed Project would result in a significant increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration would occur because the Project includes new recreational facilities for residents within the Project site, and provides funding to existing park facilities through required fees.
The proposed Project would not significantly increase the use of an existing park, or other recreational facility. Therefore, it is not anticipated that any substantial physical deterioration of existing facilities would occur or be accelerated. As such, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
683
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.12-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page left intentionally blank.
684
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-1 This section of the EIR analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed Project on the surrounding transportation system including roadways, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, rail, and transit facilities/services. This section identifies the significant impacts of the proposed Project. An evaluation of vehicular access to the proposed Project is also provided. All technical calculations are in the Transportation Analysis Report prepared by LSA for the proposed Project (provided in Appendix I of this EIR).
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meetings for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic. Each of the comments related to this topic are addressed within this section. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.13.1 INTRODUCTION
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 Project location on the USGS Clovis, California, 7.5-minute series quadrangle map.
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.
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. 685
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
STUDY AREA
The Local Transportation Analysis (LTA) for the project examines traffic operations in the vicinity of the proposed Project under the following five scenarios:
• Existing Conditions
• Existing Plus Project Conditions
• Near‐Term Plus Project Conditions
• Cumulative without Project Conditions
• Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
Traffic conditions at study intersections and roadway segments were examined for weekday a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour conditions. The a.m. peak hour is defined as the 1 hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. The p.m. peak hour is the 1 hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Additionally, since the Project is estimated to be completed in 2028, the Near‐Term condition was evaluated for the year 2028.
As per the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, the extent of the ‘Study Area’ includes the following:
• Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities within 0.5 mile from the project site boundary • All intersections of major streets that would provide direct access to the Project • All signalized intersections within 0.5 mile of the Project site boundary where the project would add 50 or more peak‐hour trips, and signalized intersections beyond 0.5 mile where the project would add 100 or more peak‐hour trips
• All unsignalized intersections within a 0.5 mile of the project site boundary where the project would add more than 50 peak‐hour trips
Based on the aforementioned criteria and as per discussion with the City and adjacent jurisdictions during the scoping agreement process, the following intersections and roadway segments have been included in the LTA. Figure 3.13-1 illustrates the Study Area Roadway Classifications.
Study Intersections
Twenty-six existing intersections were selected for study. The study intersections include:
1. Willow Avenue/Behymer Avenue (Clovis/Fresno)
2. Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis/ Fresno)
3. Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (Clovis)
4. Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
5. Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
6. Clovis Avenue/Teague Avenue (Clovis)
7. Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue (Clovis)
8. Clovis Avenue/Alluvial Avenue (Clovis)
686
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-3
9. State Route 168 (SR‐168) Westbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue (Caltrans)
10. SR‐168 Eastbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue (Caltrans)
11. Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue (Clovis)
12. Sunnyside Avenue/Behymer Avenue (Clovis)
13. Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
14. Sunnyside Avenue/Teague Avenue (Clovis)
15. Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue (Clovis)
16. Fowler Avenue/Behymer Avenue (Clovis)
17. Fowler Avenue/Ticonderoga (Clovis)
18. Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
19. Fowler Avenue/Teague Avenue (Clovis)
20. Fowler Avenue/Nees Avenue (Clovis)
21. Fowler Avenue/SR‐168 Westbound Ramps (Caltrans)
22. Fowler Avenue/SR‐168 Eastbound Ramps (Caltrans)
23. Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 1 (Clovis)
24. Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 2 (Clovis)
25. Project Driveway 3/Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
26. Project Driveway 4‐Stanford Avenue/Perrin Road (Clovis) Roadway Segments
Twenty-three roadway segments were analyzed in the LTA. The roadway segments include:
1. Behymer Avenue, between Willow Avenue and Minnewawa Avenue (Clovis)
2. Behymer Avenue, between Minnewawa Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (Clovis)
3. Behymer Avenue, between Sunnyside Avenue and Fowler Avenue (Clovis)
4. Shepherd Avenue, between Willow Avenue and Minnewawa Avenue (Clovis)
5. Shepherd Avenue, between Minnewawa Avenue and Clovis Avenue (Clovis)
6. Shepherd Avenue, between Clovis Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (Clovis)
7. Shepherd Avenue, between Sunnyside Avenue and Project Driveway 3 (Clovis)
8. Shepherd Avenue, between Project Driveway 3 and Fowler Avenue (Clovis)
9. Herndon Avenue, between State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps and Clovis Avenue (Clovis)
10. Willow Avenue, between Behymer Avenue and Shepherd Avenue (Clovis/Fresno)
11. Minnewawa Avenue, between Behymer Avenue and Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
12. Clovis Avenue, between Shepherd Avenue and Teague Avenue (Clovis)
13. Clovis Avenue, between Teague Avenue and Nees Avenue (Clovis)
14. Clovis Avenue, between Nees Avenue and Alluvial Avenue (Clovis)
15. Clovis Avenue, between Alluvial Avenue and Herndon Avenue (Clovis)
16. Sunnyside Avenue, between Project Driveway 1 and Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
17. Sunnyside Avenue, between Shepherd Avenue and Teague Avenue (Clovis)
18. Sunnyside Avenue, between Teague Avenue and Nees Avenue (Clovis)
19. Fowler Avenue, between Behymer Avenue and Ticonderoga (Clovis) 687
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
20. Fowler Avenue, between Ticonderoga and Shepherd Avenue (Clovis)
21. Fowler Avenue, between Shepherd Avenue and Teague Avenue (Clovis)
22. Fowler Avenue, between Teague Avenue and Nees Avenue (Clovis)
23. Fowler Avenue, between Nees Avenue and State Route 168 Westbound Ramps (Clovis) For each roadway segment, the highest volume on any part of the segment has been considered as the analysis volume for the entire segment.
STUDY SCENARIOS
The study intersections were evaluated for the following five scenarios:
1. Existing Conditions – Analyzes operations as they exist today.
2. Existing Plus Project Conditions – Analyzes existing operations with the addition of trips generated from the Development Area.
3. Near‐Term Plus Project Conditions – Analyzes cumulative year volumes with the addition of trips generated from the Development Area in the near-term (2028)
4. Cumulative No Project Conditions – Analyzes cumulative year volumes based on the forecast volumes obtained from the Fresno Council of Governments.
5. Cumulative Plus Project Conditions – Analyzes cumulative year volumes with the addition of trips generated from the Development Area in the long-term (2046).
3.13.2 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
DATA COLLECTION
Traffic volumes for Existing Conditions are typically developed using existing count data collected at Study Area intersections and roadway segments.
Traffic volumes under Near‐Term Plus Project Conditions were developed by adding traffic volumes from approved and pending projects located near the Study Area and Project traffic to existing traffic volumes.
Traffic volumes for cumulative year without project conditions were developed by using forecast volumes obtained from the Fresno COG ABM. The methodology to develop cumulative year without project traffic volumes at Study Area intersections and roadway segments were consistent with the COG’s procedures for post‐processing of modeled traffic volumes. The resulting intersection and roadway segment LOS will be calculated using the previously discussed methodologies.
Existing and Cumulative year Plus Project traffic volumes were developed by adding Project traffic to the traffic volumes for the corresponding without Project scenarios.
VMT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
On December 28, 2018, the California Office of Administrative Law cleared the revised CEQA Guidelines for use. Among the changes to the CEQA Guidelines was the removal of vehicle delay 688
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-5 and LOS from consideration under CEQA. With the adopted CEQA Guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project’s effect on VMT. The City’s TIA Guidelines includes screening criteria, VMT analysis methodology, VMT impact thresholds, and VMT mitigation measures. Therefore, the City’s TIA Guidelines were used in the evaluation of the Project’s VMT analysis.
VMT METHODOLOGY
The TIA Guidelines provide multiple project types and thresholds for land use projects. The Project was compared with the screening criteria established in the “Project Screening” section of the TIA Guidelines to check if the project can be screened out. The following is a brief description of the project in relation with the project screening criteria:
Small Project: The TIA Guidelines states that projects generating less than 500 daily trips could be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis. As discussed in Section 6.1, Project Trip Generation, the project is estimated to generate 5,705 daily trips. Therefore, the Project does not satisfy this screening criteria.
• Provision of Affordable Housing: The project proposes to develop market‐rate, single‐ family dwelling units. Therefore, this screening criteria does not apply to the project. • Local‐Serving Retail: The project consists of residential land use only; therefore, this screening criteria does not apply to the project.
• Project Located in a High‐Quality Transit Area (HQTA): The project is not located within an HQTA; therefore, this screening criteria does not apply to the project. • Project Located in Low VMT Area: The project is not located in a low VMT area; therefore, this criteria does not apply to the project.
As shown above, the Project could not be screened out from a detailed VMT analysis. As such, pursuant to the TIA Guidelines, a detailed VMT analysis was conducted to assess the Project’s VMT impact.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Project consists of residential land use. The TIA Guidelines established VMT per capita as the appropriate metric to evaluate residential land use projects while defining Fresno County as the “region” for determining VMT thresholds. The Project would have a significant VMT impact if the baseline Project VMT per capita is greater than 87 percent of the baseline Fresno County VMT per capita. Based on the TIA Guidelines, baseline City of Clovis VMT per capita is 16.1 and the corresponding threshold is 14.1 (which is 87 percent of 16.1). Therefore, the Project will have a significant VMT impact if the Project VMT per capita is greater than 14.1.
As recommended in the TIA Guidelines, the Fresno COG ABM was used for the Project VMT analysis.
The model inputs were updated with the Project land uses to calculate Project VMT. The Project VMT was calculated from a Fresno COG ABM model run as described in the following sections. 689
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Study intersections were analyzed using procedures and methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual – 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016). These methodologies were applied using Synchro 11 software which considers traffic volumes, lane configurations, signal timings, signal coordination, and other pertinent parameters of intersection operations.
Level of Service (LOS)
The operational performance of the roadway network is commonly described with the term Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions whereby a letter grade, from A (the best) to F (the worst), is assigned. These grades represent the perspective of drivers and are an indication of the comfort and convenience associated with driving. In general, LOS A represents free-flow conditions with no congestion, and LOS F represents severe congestion and delay under stop-and-go conditions. For signalized intersections, roundabouts and all way stop control intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by all vehicles passing through the intersection:
• Signalized Intersections
o If the project triggers a signalized intersection operating at an acceptable LOS to operate at an unacceptable LOS;
o If the project increases the average delay for average delay for a signalized intersection that is already operating at an unacceptable LOS. • Unsignalized Intersections
o If the project triggers an unsignalized intersection operating at acceptable LOS to operate at unacceptable LOS (from E or better to F) and meet the signal warrants criteria;
o If the project increases the applicable delay for an unsignalized study intersection that is already operating at unacceptable LOS and meets the signal warrant criteria.
The City of Clovis considers LOS D as the LOS standard for study intersections and roadway segments under near‐term conditions, unless a finding of overriding consideration was adopted in the City’s General Plan EIR. The same criterion holds for long‐term conditions, except for roadway segments that are adopted in the City’s General Plan EIR to operate at LOS E or F. The City’s TIA Guidelines do not define an LOS standard under Existing Plus Project conditions. For the purpose of this analysis, an LOS standard of D has been considered for intersections and roadway segments under Existing Plus Project conditions. The City of Clovis considers the following operational deficiency criteria for study intersections.
Per the City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines, updated February 2009, LOS D is considered the LOS standard for study intersections and roadway segments under near‐term conditions. The same criterion holds for long‐term conditions, except for roadway segments that are adopted in the City’s Master General Plan to operate at LOS E or F. The City’s TIA Guidelines do not define an LOS standard under Existing Plus Project conditions. 690
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-7 It should be noted that all City of Fresno study intersections and roadway segments are located within the City of Fresno Traffic Impact Zone (TIZ) III. Per the City of Fresno’s General Plan, all intersections and roadway segments within TIZ III should maintain a peak‐hour LOS standard of D or better. Therefore, an LOS standard of D has been considered for intersections and roadway segments within Fresno for all analysis conditions. The City of Fresno considers the following operational deficiency criteria for study intersections:
• An operational deficiency is created if the addition of the Project traffic results in any one of the following:
o Causes the intersection LOS to change from acceptable to unacceptable levels; o Causes the intersection LOS to change from an unacceptable LOS (LOS E) to LOS F; o Increases the average delay at a study intersection that is already operating at an unacceptable LOS.
City of Fresno’s Traffic Impact Study guidelines do not define an operational deficiency criterion for roadway segments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, at intersections under City of Fresno jurisdiction, an operational deficiency has been considered when the project causes an unsatisfactory condition (deterioration from LOS A through D to E or F) or when the project contributes to an existing or forecast deficiency.
Caltrans considers an acceptable LOS to be between LOS C and D at all intersections under its jurisdiction (delay of 45 seconds at signalized intersections). Caltrans does not have any operational deficiency criteria for study intersections. Therefore, an operational deficiency occurs when the project causes an unsatisfactory condition (deterioration from LOS A through D to E or F) for intersections or when the project contributes to an existing or forecast deficiency. The project needs to identify improvements to improve the intersection LOS to an acceptable level.
Although LOS cannot be used as a CEQA metric to identify significant transportation impacts, intersection operations were analyzed for the proposed Project and are discussed in section 3.13.8, Impact Analysis.
3.13.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This subsection presents the existing bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities as well as intersection operations under Existing Conditions.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES
The vision of the City of Clovis Active Transportation Plan (ATP), updated January 2022, is a “City with a complete and connected network of trails, walkways, and bikeways that provides convenient and intuitive connections to key destinations and supports travel within and between neighborhoods. The network improves quality of life by encouraging walking and bicycling for transportation and recreation.” The ATP identifies different strategies to improve safety and 691
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North accessibility for active modes of transportation such as walking and biking. There are four different types of bicycle facilities in the City:
1. Class I Bikeway: Trails
2. Class II Bikeway: Bicycle Lanes
3. Class II Bikeway: Buffered Bicycle Lanes
4. Class III Bikeway: Bicycle Routes
One of the long‐term visions of the City includes upgrading existing or recommended Class II Bicycle Lanes and Buffered Bicycle Lanes to Class IV Separated Bicycle Lanes.
Figures 3.13-2 and 3.13-3 illustrate the existing and proposed bicycle facilities within the City. At present, Class II bicycle lanes exist along Clovis Avenue, Willow Avenue, and some segments of Shepherd Avenue and Fowler Avenue within the Study Area. However, as shown in Figure 3.13-3, different bicycle facilities are proposed along other roadways within the Study Area, such as Sunnyside Avenue, Teague Avenue, Nees Avenue, and Alluvial Avenue.
PEDESTRIAN
The City has an extensive pedestrian network, with sidewalks along most of the major roads.
However, since a portion of the Study Area falls within recently incorporated areas of the City, sidewalks are not present because they were previously developed as per unincorporated Fresno County design guidelines. Figure 3.13-4 illustrates the existing sidewalk facilities within the City of Clovis.
The City’s ATP has identified improvements to the pedestrian network based on a citywide sidewalk network gap analysis. Additionally, several potential locations have been identified to install mid‐ block crossings to improve trail connectivity throughout Clovis. Two trails (i.e., the Dry Creek Trail and the Enterprise Trail) currently exist within the Study Area. However, additional trails are being proposed in the Study Area with potential mid‐block crossings.
TRANSIT SERVICE
Clovis Transit Stageline Routes 10 and 80 operate within the Study Area. Route 10 operates from Monday through Saturday, while Route 80 operates only on school days, based on the Clovis Unified School District schedule. Route 10 provide access to Fresno State University and Route 80 provides access to the Buchanan Education Complex. Fresno Area Express (FAX) operates within the Study Area along Willow Avenue 7 days a week. The route connects communities in Fresno to the different campuses of Clovis Community College. In addition to fixed route services, Round Up is the Clovis paratransit service for disabled City residents. Round Up transit vehicles are all accessible in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards.
EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for Existing Conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Existing Signal timing Sheets were obtained from the City and Caltrans for all signalized analysis intersections. The signal timing sheets are included in Appendix C of the 692
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-9 Transportation Impact Report (Appendix I of this EIR). It should be noted that the existing signal timings were utilized to analyze traffic operations under near‐term and cumulative (2046) scenarios as a conservative approach. Table 8‐A summarizes the results of this analysis and shows that the following intersections operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under existing conditions:
• Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (a.m. peak hour only) • Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. peak hour only)
• Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps (p.m. peak hour only) All other study intersections operate at a satisfactory LOS under existing conditions.
A roadway segment LOS analysis was conducted for Existing Conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Table 8‐B summarizes the results of this analysis and shows that all the study roadway segments currently operate at a satisfactory LOS under existing conditions.
Technical calculations are displayed in Appendix E of the Transportation Analysis Report prepared by LSA for the proposed Project (contained within Appendix I of this EIR).
3.13.4 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
The trip generation for the proposed Project was developed using rates from the Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021) for Land Use 210 – “Single‐Family Detached Housing.” Table 3.13-3 summarizes the project trip generation. As shown in Table 6‐A, the Project is anticipated to generate 424 trips in the a.m. peak hour, 569 trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 5,705 daily trips.
TABLE 3.13-3: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
LAND USE UNITS
AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
Single-Family Residential
Detached Housing
(ITE 210)
605 DU 109 315 424 357 212 569
NOTES: TRIP GENERATION IS BASED ON TRIP RATES PUBLISHED IN TRIP GENERATION MANUAL 11TH EDITION (INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 2021).
SOURCE: LSA, 2023
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Project trip distribution was developed using select zone model runs obtained from the Fresno COG ABM. Appendix A of Transportation Impact Report (Appendix I of this EIR) includes the select zone model plots for the proposed Project. Figure 3.14-5 illustrates the Project trip distribution. The Project trip generation was applied to the corresponding trip distribution pattern to develop the Project trip assignment. Figure 3.14-6 illustrates the Project trip assignment. 693
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Analysis of the existing with Project scenario is provided to identify direct Project‐related operational deficiency if the Project were to be built and in operation today. This scenario eliminates the effects of ambient growth and other cumulative projects and deals specifically with operational deficiencies only due to the Project traffic. Figure 3.13-7 illustrates the study intersection geometrics and traffic control under all ‘plus Project’ scenarios.
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for Existing Plus Project Conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. The following intersections are forecasted to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Existing Plus Project conditions:
• Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (a.m. peak hour only) • Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only) • Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps (p.m. peak hour only) Based on the operational deficiency criteria stated in Section 3.2 of this TIA, the Project is forecasted to create an operational deficiency at these intersections. All other study intersections are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Existing Plus Project conditions.
It should be noted that out of the five intersections forecasted to operate at a deficient LOS, three intersections are currently operating at a deficient LOS. As such, the Project is forecast to add to the existing deficiencies at these intersections.
A roadway segment LOS analysis was conducted for Existing Plus Project Conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Table 8‐B summarizes the results of this analysis and shows that all study roadway segments are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Existing Plus Project conditions.
3.13.5 NEAR-TERM CUMULATIVE (2028) CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
A Near-Term Cumulative Conditions analysis was performed to identify potential impacts of the Project under Cumulative AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis reflects near-term development in the City of Clovis and other nearby jurisdictions.
NEAR-TERM PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for Near-term Plus Project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. The following intersections are forecasted to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under near-term plus project conditions:
• Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (a.m. peak hour only) 694
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-11 • Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/SR-168 Eastbound Ramps (p.m. peak hour only) Based on the operational deficiency criteria stated in Section 3.2 of the Transportation Impact Report (as provided in Appendix I of this EIR), the Project is forecasted to create an operational deficiency at these intersections. All other study intersections are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Near-Term Plus Project conditions.
3.13.6 CUMULATIVE (2046) CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
A Cumulative Conditions analysis was performed to identify potential impacts of the Project under Cumulative AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis reflects long-term development in the City of Clovis and other nearby jurisdictions.
CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for Cumulative Without Project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. The following intersections are forecasted to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Cumulative Without Project conditions:
• Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/Teague Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/SR‐168 Eastbound Ramps (p.m. peak hour only).
All other study intersections are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Cumulative (2046) Without Project conditions.
A roadway segment LOS analysis was conducted for cumulative without project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Table 8‐F summarizes the results of this analysis and shows 695
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North that the following roadway segments are forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Cumulative Without Project conditions:
• Behymer Avenue, between Minnewawa Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (a.m. peak hour only)
• Shepherd Avenue, between Willow Avenue and Minnewawa Avenue (p.m. peak hour only) • Shepherd Avenue, between Clovis Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (p.m. peak hour only) • Minnewawa Avenue, between Behymer Avenue and Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Sunnyside Avenue, between Shepherd Avenue and Project Driveway 1 (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Fowler Avenue, between Ticonderoga and Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours).
All other roadway segments are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under cumulative without project conditions.
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
An intersection LOS analysis was conducted for Cumulative Plus Project Conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. The following intersection is forecasted to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions:
• Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (p.m. peak hour only)
• Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Clovis Avenue/Alluvial Avenue (a.m. peak hour only)
• Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/Teague Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Fowler Avenue/SR‐168 Eastbound Ramps (p.m. peak hour only) • Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 1 (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) • Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 2 (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) Based on the operational deficiency criteria, the Project is forecasted to create an operational deficiency at these intersections. All other study intersections are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under cumulative plus project conditions. It should be noted that out of the 14 intersections forecast to operate at a deficient LOS, 11 intersections forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under cumulative (2046) without project conditions. As such, the project is forecast 696
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-13 to add to the forecasted deficiencies at these 11 intersections. Detailed intersection LOS worksheets are included in Appendix I.
A roadway segment LOS analysis was conducted for cumulative plus project conditions using the methodologies previously discussed. Table 8‐F summarizes the results of this analysis and shows that the following roadway segments are forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions:
• Behymer Avenue, between Minnewawa Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (a.m. peak hour only)
• Shepherd Avenue, between Willow Avenue and Minnewawa Avenue (p.m. peak hour only) • Shepherd Avenue, between Clovis Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Shepherd Avenue, between Sunnyside Avenue and Project Driveway 3 (p.m. peak hour only)
• Minnewawa Avenue, between Behymer Avenue and Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Sunnyside Avenue, between Shepherd Avenue and Project Driveway 1 (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
• Fowler Avenue, between Ticonderoga and Shepherd Avenue (a.m. and p.m. peak hours) Based on the operational deficiency criteria, the Project is forecasted to create an operational deficiency at these roadway segments. All other roadway segments are forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. It should be noted that out of the seven roadway segments forecast to operate at a deficient LOS, six segments are forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under Cumulative (2046) Without Project Conditions. As such, the Project is forecast to add to the forecasted deficiencies at these six roadway segments.
3.13.7 REGULATORY SETTING
Existing transportation polices, laws, and regulations that would apply to the proposed Project are summarized below. This information provides a context for the impact discussion related to the Project’s consistency with applicable regulatory conditions and development of significance criteria for evaluating Project impacts.
STATE
Senate Bill 743
Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed into law in 2013 and is leading to substantial changes in the way transportation impact analyses are being prepared. Notably, it precludes the use of level of service (LOS) to identify significant transportation impacts in CEQA documents for land use projects, recommending instead that VMT be used as the preferred metric. On December 28, 2018, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to add Section 15064.3, Determining the Significance of Transportation 697
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Impacts, which states that generally, VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. According to 15064.3(a), “Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) (regarding roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.” Beginning on July 1, 2020, the provisions of 15064.3 applied statewide.
To aid in SB 743 implementation, OPR released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) in December 2018. The Technical Advisory provides advice and recommendations to CEQA lead agencies on how to implement the SB 743 changes. This includes technical recommendations regarding the assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, VMT mitigation measures, and screening thresholds for certain land use projects. Lead agencies may consider and use these recommendations at their discretion and with the provision of substantial evidence to support alternative approaches.
The Technical Advisory identifies “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. The Technical Advisory suggests that projects meeting one or more of the following criteria should be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT:
1. Small projects – projects consistent with a SCS and local general plan that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day.
2. Projects near major transit stops – certain projects (residential, retail, office, or a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor.
3. Affordable residential development – a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.
4. Local-serving retail – local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. The Technical Advisory encourages lead agencies to decide when a project will likely be local-serving, but generally acknowledges that retail development including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving. The Technical Advisory suggests lead agencies analyze whether regional-serving retail would increase or decrease VMT (i.e., not presume a less-than-significant).
5. Projects in low VMT areas – residential and office projects that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility) as existing development in areas with low VMT will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT.
The Technical Advisory also identifies recommended numeric VMT thresholds for residential, office, and retail projects. The residential threshold is described below.
1. Residential development that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 13 percent below existing (baseline) residential VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing VMT per capita may be measured as a regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita.
698
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-15
LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)
As previously noted, LOS may no longer be used to identify significant transportation impacts in CEQA documents for land use projects. However, this analysis includes a LOS analysis to determine if the proposed Project would result in deficient intersection operations per the City of Clovis standards. Policy 2.1 of the General Plan strives for LOS D or better.
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 policies applicable to the Project are identified below:
POLICIES: CIRCULATION ELEMENT
1. 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.
2. Policy 1.2. Transportation decisions. Decisions should balance the comfort, convenience, and safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.
3. Policy 1.3. Age and mobility. The design of roadways shall consider all potential users, including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities.
4. 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.
5. Policy 1.5. Neighborhood connectivity. The transportation network shall provide multimodal access between neighborhoods and neighborhood-serving uses (educational, recreational, or neighborhood commercial uses).
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Policy 2.1. Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:
A. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
B. Allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
i. Preserving agriculture or open space land;
ii. Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood; iii. Preserving or creating a pedestrian-friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts;
iv. Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders; 699
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North v. Where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible.
9. Policy 2.2. Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.
10. Policy 2.3. Right-of-way dedication. The city may require right-of-way dedication essential to the circulation system in conjunction with any development or annexation. The City shall request the County of Fresno to apply the same requirements in the Clovis planning area.
11. Policy 3.1. Traffic calming. Employ traffic-calming measures in new developments and existing neighborhoods to control traffic speeds and maintain safety.
12. Policy 3.4. Road diets. Minimize roadway width as feasible to serve adjacent neighborhoods while maintaining sufficient space for public safety services.
13. Policy 3.5. Roadway widening. Only consider street widening or intersection expansions after considering multimodal alternative improvements to non-automotive facilities.
14. Policy 3.6. Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.
15. Policy 3.7. Conflict points. Minimize the number of and enhance safety at vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle conflict points.
16. Policy 3.8. Access management. Minimize access points and curb cuts along arterials and prohibit them within 200 feet of an intersection where possible. Eliminate and/or consolidate driveways when new development occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants.
17. Policy 3.9. Park-once. Encourage “park-once” designs where convenient, centralized public parking areas are accompanied by safe, visible, and well-marked access to sidewalks and businesses.
18. 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.
19. Policy 3.11. Right-of-way design. Design landscaped parkways, medians, and right-of-ways as aesthetic buffers to improve the community’s appearance and encourage non-motorized transportation.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. Policy 5.3. Pathways. Encourage pathways and other pedestrian amenities in Urban Centers and new development 10 acres or larger.
23. 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.
24. Policy 5.5. Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity.
700
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-17 City of Clovis Active Transportation Plan
The Clovis Active Transportation Plan is a comprehensive guide that supports walking, bicycling, transit, and use of other emerging modes of personal transport as alternatives to driving within Clovis, to neighboring cities, and regional destinations. The Plan identifies strategies to improve safety and accessibility for active forms of travel such as walking and bicycling and proposes a framework for implementing projects, programs, and policies.
Fresno County Regional Transportation Plan
Fresno Council of Government’s (Fresno COG’s) 2022 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) comprehensively assesses all forms of transportation available in Fresno County as well as travel and goods movement needs through 2046.
Fresno County Regional Traffic Impact Fee
The Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) is a county-wide, multi-jurisdiction capital improvement funding program intended to cover a portion of the costs for new transportation facilities required to serve new development within the County.
3.13.8 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
This section describes the thresholds or criteria that determine whether the Project causes a significant impact on the roadway, bicycle, pedestrian,rail, and/or transit systems. These thresholds are based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), policies from the General Plans for the City of Clovis and Fresno County, and Caltrans policies. For the purposes of this Draft EIR, the Project would cause a significant impact if it would result in any of the following listed criteria:
1. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities;
2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b);
3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); and/or
4. Result in inadequate emergency access.
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that impacts may be significant if a project conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The proposed Project would have a significant impact on transit, bicycles, or pedestrians if it would conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding these systems, or create or exacerbate disruptions to the performance or safety of these systems.
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that impacts may be significant if a project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Impacts may also be significant if a 701
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North project results in inadequate emergency access. The proposed Project would have a significant impact on the transportation system if it would increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access.
The existing General Plan includes a policy within the Transportation Element which requires maintenance of a level of service (LOS) D standard on City roadways, with some exceptions. Because LOS is no longer a CEQA significance metric, an analysis of LOS is provided for the purposes of policy consistency analysis.
3.13.9 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.13-1: Project implementation would not result in VMT increases that are greater than 87 percent of Baseline conditions. (Significant and Unavoidable)
The proposed development was evaluated against the screening criteria in OPR’s Technical Advisory. The following criteria is applicable to residential developments.
1. Small projects – projects consistent with a Sustainable Communities Strategy and local general plan that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day.
2. Projects near major transit stops – certain projects (residential, retail, office, or a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor.
3. Affordable residential development – a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.
4. Projects in low VMT areas – residential and office projects that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility) as existing development in areas with low VMT will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT.
The SB 743 Memorandum identifies the recommended numeric VMT thresholds for residential projects. Based on the VMT thresholds, a residential project would result in a less-than-significant transportation impact if:
5. Under existing (baseline) conditions, the residential development would generate homebased VMT per dwelling unit equal or below 87 percent of the existing (baseline) City of Clovis average for the same housing category (single family, multi-family, or age-restricted); and
6. Under cumulative conditions, the residential development would generate home-based VMT per dwelling equal or below 87 percent of the cumulative City of Clovis average for the same housing category (single family, multi-family, or age-restricted).
Alternatively, the project would result in a less-than-significant transportation impact if:
702
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-19
7. The residential development would cause the total VMT in the model area to decrease under baseline AND cumulative conditions.
The proposed development does not constitute a small project, is not located within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop and is not a redevelopment project. Therefore, the development is not eligible to be screened out based on these criteria.
A detailed VMT analysis was conducted using methodology discussed in Appendix I of this EIR. The proposed residential development would result in a significant transportation impact if it would 1). generate vehicle travel exceeding 87 percent of the established baseline VMT under existing (baseline) or cumulative conditions, or 2). result in an increase in total VMT in the model area.
Table 3.13-5 summarizes the regional threshold and Project VMT per capita. As shown in Table 3.13- 5, the Project VMT per capita is 20.7 percent higher than the City’s VMT per capita threshold.
Therefore, based on the TIA Guidelines, the project will have a significant VMT impact.
TABLE 3.13-2: EXISTING (2019) REGIONAL AND PROJECT VMT PER CAPITA
REGION (FRESNO COUNTY)
1 PROJECT DIFFERENCE PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE
14.1 17.0 2.9 20.7%
NOTES:
1 THE CITY OF CLOVIS VMT PER CAPITA WAS OBTAINED FROM THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES, CITY OF CLOVIS (SEPTEMBER 15, 2022)
VMT= VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
SOURCE: FRESNO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS' ACTIVITY‐BASED MODE When a lead agency identifies a significant CEQA impact, the agency must identify feasible mitigation measures in order to avoid or substantially reduce that impact. VMT impacts can be mitigated through more behavioral changes. Enforcement of mitigation measures will be subject to the mitigation monitoring requirements under CEQA, as well as the regular police powers of the agency. These measures can also be incorporated as a part of plans, policies, regulations, or project designs. Project design features that encourage mode shift from automobiles to transit or non‐ motorized modes can therefore help reduce Project VMT as well. Typically, VMT reduction and benefits from these Project design features are not accounted in the Project VMT calculations conducted using the regional travel demand model. Therefore, VMT reduction credit can be accounted for these design features similar to VMT mitigation measures to help reduce the Project’s VMT impact.
Evaluation of VMT reductions should be evaluated using state‐of‐the‐practice methodologies recognizing that many of the VMT mitigation strategies/project design features are dependent on building tenant performance over time. Following is a detailed description of both and the corresponding potential reduction that could be achieved with implementation of these measures.
PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES AND MITIGATION MEASURES
703
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North VMT reduction that can be achieved by the Project design features have been estimated using the most California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) “Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity – Designed for Local Governments, Communities, and Project Developers” dated December 2021. As per information provided by the Project Description, the Project intends to implement the following Project design features that will help reduce Project VMT. • Pedestrian Infrastructure: The Project proposes to provide pedestrian improvements/sidewalks both internal to the Project site and along the Project frontage.
Providing sidewalk/pedestrian improvements encourage people to walk instead of drive and thus reduces VMT. CAPCOA transportation measure T-18: Provide Pedestrian Network Improvement was used to estimate the VMT reduction due to Project related enhancements in pedestrian access and connectivity. The CAPCOA methodology requires existing sidewalk length in the Project study area in addition to the length of sidewalk being provided by the Project. In order to estimate the existing sidewalk length, a survey was conducted along the proposed Project frontage. Based on the survey, the Project study area includes approximately 10 miles of sidewalk. The Project proposes to add approximately another 2.3 miles of sidewalk/pedestrian access. Therefore, this measure may reduce the Project’s VMT by approximately 1.17 percent.
• Improve Street Connectivity: The Project proposes to provide an internal circulation network. Projects with higher density of intersections would help increase street connectivity, reduce trip lengths, and promote use of alternative transportation modes of travel. CAPCOA handbook, identifies measure T-17: Improve Street Connectivity to evaluate Project street network. The measure is recommended as an appropriate design feature for plans within urban or suburban areas. The Project is located in suburban/rural area type setting, so this measure was explored as a potential VMT reduction design feature.
Measure T-17 estimates that an increased density of vehicular intersections improves street connectivity and helps in reduction in GHG emissions and corresponding VMT. As included in the CAPCOA handbook, this measure could be applied to a project for:
‘Projects that increase intersection density would be building a new street network in a subdivision or retrofitting an existing street network to improve connectivity (e.g., converting cul-de-sacs or dead-end streets to grid streets)’.
The measure establishes the following numerical formula of VMT reduction due to increased intersection density and improved street connectivity:
𝐴 =
𝐵 − 𝐶
𝐶
∗ 𝐷
Where,
A = Percent Reduction in GHG/VMT emission from vehicle Travel B = Intersection Density in project site with measure
704
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-21 C = Average Intersection Density for Typical developments (36) D = Elasticity of VMT with respect to intersection density (-0.14) The CAPCOA handbook establishes the variable C using an average density of intersections within a square mile in a typical development as included in the Proposed Trip Generation, Distribution, and Transit Mode Split Forecasts for the Bayview Waterfront Project Transportation Study, Fehr & Peers. 2009. This establishes the average suburban intersection density for the entire United States.
The CAPCOA handbook adapts the variable D, Elasticity of VMT with respect to intersection density from the report ‘Does Compact Development Make People Drive Less?’ published in the Journal of the American Planning Association, 2016, authored by Mark R. Stevens.
The elasticity was determined from a meta-regression analysis from data of fifteen studies, having studied in different urban/suburban geographic regions within the Country.
While the increased intersection density helps facilitate greater number of short trips, the project consists of only single land use type (residential) and the amount of internal capture (trips that can be fulfilled within the project; with both origin and destinations within the project site) would be minimal. Also, CAPCOA suggests application of different VMT mitigation measures at different scales – project/site scale or community/plan scale. Based on CAPCOA handbook, this measure is applicable at a plan/community scale. However, this measure was explored as a VMT reduction design feature at a project scale with appropriate limitations as described below.
While all the internal intersections can be considered to estimate the VMT reduction due to increased street connectivity, given the above limitations (project location area type, single land use type, and CAPCOA applicability scale), only project driveways were reviewed for applicability for this measure. As indicated in section “1.1 – Project Description,” the Project has four driveways (two on Sunnyside Avenue, one of Perrin Road, and one on Shepherd Avenue) for Project access. Except for the driveway on Shepherd Avenue, all other Project driveways will operate as full-access driveways. The driveway on Shepherd Avenue will operate as a Right-In Right-Out Left-In (RIROLI) driveway. However, all 4 Project driveways were considered as Project intersections for the mitigation purposes. The proposed Project site is approximately 77 acres. Therefore, the intersection density of the Project would be approximately 33.25 intersections per square mile.
Since Project intersection density is lower than the countrywide average intersection density of 36 intersections per square mile as identified in the CAPCOA handbook, no direct VMT reduction has been accounted for this Project design feature. 705
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North • Bicycle Infrastructure/Improvements: The Project proposes to provide 8-feet wide bike lanes (Class II Bike Lane) on Shepherd Avenue and N. Sunnyside Avenue. Additionally, the Project will install a 12-foot trail (Class I Bike Path) adjacent to the Project along Shepherd Avenue. The Project proposes to construct a total of 0.67 miles of bike lanes along Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue. Similar to pedestrian facilities, these bicycle design features included in the Project can encourage increase active transportation mode share in the area. The CAPCOA manual was utilized to estimate the reduction of Project VMT due to proposed bicycle improvements. Specifically, CAPCOA transportation measure “T-19A:
Construct or Improve Bike Facility” was deemed applicable to estimate the VMT reduction due to Project bicycle features. According to the measure, providing bicycle infrastructure helps to improve biking conditions within an area. This encourages a mode shift on the roadway parallel to the bicycle facility from vehicles to bicycles, displacing VMT and thus reducing GHG emissions. Based on CAPCOA estimates, the Project bicycle design features have a potential to reduce up to 0.01 percent of the Project VMT. • Provide Electric Vehicle (EV) Parking and EV Charging Infrastructure: Accessible EV parking and provision of charging for electric vehicles in the residential units will encourage the use of EVs. The latest California Green Building Standards (CALGreen), California Building Code, requires provision of infrastructure to accommodate electric vehicle chargers for new single-family and attached dwelling units/town houses. For new construction projects such as apartments, condos, hotels, and motels, CALGreen code requires the project to provide EV charging stations as a percentage of the total Project parking. While it is understood that provision of electric charging infrastructure/stations might not reduce VMT, it will reduce GHG, which can be considered equivalent to reduction in VMT. According to CAPCOA, provision of additional electric charging stations, in addition to CALGreen requirements, can be considered as a GHG/VMT mitigation. Provision of EV charging infrastructure has a potential to achieve a maximum VMT reduction of up to 11.9 percent. However, the Project is a single-family residential development and as such, doesn’t propose to provide electric charging stations beyond the CALGreen code requirements. Additionally, there is no guarantee that residents would be using electric vehicles even if charging stations are available. As such, while this Project design feature has the potential to reduce GHG emissions, no direct VMT reduction has been accounted for this Project design feature.
Table 2-B in the Transportation Impact Report (Appendix I of this EIR) provides methodology, assumptions, and parameters used in the estimation/calculation of VMT reduction for the Project along with the potential amount of VMT reduction that can be achieved.
In conclusion, Project design features aim to promote overall mobility with the goal of reducing VMT and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Implementation of these Project design features may possibly reduce the Project’s VMT by approximately up to 1.18 percent. A combination of measures from several VMT reduction strategies were incorporated into the Project design to achieve this VMT reduction as outlined above. This included strategies that are aimed at reducing the number 706
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-23 of automobile trips generated by the Project, shift more trips from automobile to non-automobile modes, and/or reduce the distances that people drive. Ultimately, however, the City of Clovis is a suburban community with land use characteristics that are more spread out when compared to dense urban communities. The land use and transportation characteristics of suburban communities such as Clovis, can make it difficult, or impossible to achieve VMT reductions to levels that the City has established as a goal, and ultimately, as a threshold of significance for CEQA analysis. The Project design features are estimated to offset some of the VMT impacts of the Project by reducing VMT by up to 1.18 percent, but this reduction will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, the Project will have a significant and unavoidable relative to this topic.
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. (Less than Significant) The City of Clovis ATP (2022) and City of Clovis General Plan (2014) were reviewed to determine if the proposed Project results in any inconsistencies with adopted transportation related policies.
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (ATP)
At the present, Class II bicycle lanes exist along Clovis Avenue, Willow Avenue, and some segments of Shepherd Avenue and Fowler Avenue within the vicinity of the Project Site. Furthermore, two pedestrian trails (i.e., the Dry Creek Trail and the Enterprise Trail) currently exist within the vicinity of the Project site. However, additional trails are being proposed in the vicinity of the Project site with potential mid-block crossings.
The proposed Project will also construct sidewalks on internal streets, providing adequate connections to and throughout the site for pedestrians. As mentioned before, the Project proposes to provide pedestrian improvements/sidewalks both internal to the Project site and along the Project frontage. The Project proposes to provide 8-feet wide bike lanes (Class II Bike Lane) on Shepherd Avenue and N. Sunnyside Avenue. Additionally, the Project will install a 12-foot trail (Class II Bike Path) adjacent to the Project along Shepherd Avenue. The Project proposes to construct a total of 0.67 miles of bike lanes along Shepherd Avenue and Sunnyside Avenue.
CITY OF CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN
It is noted that 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.
Additionally, the proposed Project is consistent with policies identified in the Circulation Element of the City of Clovis General Plan, as described below:
707
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Policies: Circulation Element
1. Policy 2.1. Level of service. The following is the City’s level of service (LOS) standards:
A. Achieve LOS D vehicle traffic operations during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
B. Allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis where lower levels of service would result in other public benefits, such as:
i. Preserving agriculture or open space land;
ii. Preserving the rural/historic character of a neighborhood; iii. Preserving or creating a pedestrian-friendly environment in Old Town or mixed-use village districts;
iv. Avoiding adverse impacts to pedestrians, cyclists, and mass transit riders; v. Where right-of-way constraints would make capacity expansion infeasible.
2. 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.
3. Policy 2.2. Fair share costs. New development shall pay its fair share of the cost for circulation improvements in accordance with the city’s traffic fee mitigation program.
4. Policy 3.6. Soundwalls. Design roadway networks to disperse traffic to minimize traffic levels. Discourage soundwalls along new collector and local streets when feasible.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Policy 5.5. Pedestrian access. Require sidewalks, paths, and crosswalks to provide access to schools, parks, and other activity.
As mentioned before, an analysis of the study intersections and roadway segments was performed to determine LOS as a result of Project implementation. Results of this analysis and shows that all intersections and roadway segments are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Near-Term (2028) Plus Project conditions with the exception of 10 intersections and 3 roadway segments; And all intersections and roadway segments are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under Cumulative (2046) Plus Project Conditions with the exception of 15 intersections and 10 roadway segments.
Although LOS cannot be used as a CEQA metric to identify significant transportation impacts, intersection operations were analyzed for the proposed Project and are discussed in Chapters 8 and 9 of the Transportation Impact Analysis, included in Appendix I of this EIR. Improvements have been recommended at study intersections and roadway segments where an operational deficiency has 708
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.13-25 been identified based on the results of the LOS analysis. It should be noted that as shown in Tables 8-A, 8-C, and 8-E of the Traffic Impact Analysis, the intersections of SR- 168 Westbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue, and SR- 168 Eastbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue are forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS under all scenarios. However, as shown in Tables 10-B and 10-C of the Traffic Impact Analysis, both the ramp intersections are projected to have queuing deficiencies under future conditions (near-term and cumulative scenarios). Additionally, the adjacent intersection of Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue is forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS under Near-term, and cumulative scenarios, which may further deteriorate the ramp performance due to proximity of this intersection to the freeway ramps. Therefore, an evaluation of these intersections using signal timing coordination and optimization was performed under near-term and cumulative scenario. As shown in Tables 9-C, and 9-D of the Traffic Impact Analysis, the intersection of Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue is forecast to operate at a satisfactory LOS along with the ramp intersections under near-term, and cumulative scenarios with implementation of this improvement.
Further, as shown in Tables 10-E and 10-F of the Traffic Impact Analysis, and discussed in chapter
10.0 of this report, this also helps eliminate the queuing issues at the ramp intersections along with additional storage length improvement proposed to the SR- 168 Westbound Ramps at Herndon Avenue.
Table 9‐E of Appendix E of the Transportation Impact Report (Appendix I of this EIR) summarizes the recommended improvements for roadway segments for all analysis scenarios. Tables 9‐F and 9‐ G of the Transportation Impact Report (Appendix I of this EIR) summarize the post‐improvement roadway segment LOS under near‐ term and cumulative conditions, respectively.
It should be noted that the segment of Fowler Avenue, between Ticonderoga and Shepherd Avenue is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under Cumulative (2046) without and plus project conditions. However, this segment is designated as a Rural collector (2‐lanes) in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element, and already constructed as per the General Plan Circulation Element designation. Additionally, the Project is not estimated to add any traffic at this segment during either peak hours. Therefore, no improvement has been recommended for this roadway segment.
With recommended improvements described in those chapters, all intersections would operate at LOS D or better with the addition of Project trips. Furthermore, in the absence of a fee program where the Project has an impact on the roadway network, the Project will pay its respective fair share for the proposed improvements. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a conflict with an existing or planned pedestrian facility, bicycle facility, or transit service/facility. Because the proposed Project would not conflict with adopted programs, plans, policies, or ordinances that address the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; this impact is considered less than significant. 709
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North Impact 3.13-3: Project implementation may increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access. (Less than Significant)
The preliminary site plan indicates adequate emergency access would be provided and there do not appear to be any geometric hazards. Furthermore, a sight distance analysis was conducted at the Project driveways as part of the Transportation Impact Report by LSA, included in Appendix I of this EIR. Based on the sight distance analysis, the proposed Project driveways achieve adequate sight distances and have clear sight triangles for drivers.
With consideration to pedestrian safety to nearby schools, LSA recommends that a signal to be installed at the project access intersection under the with marked crosswalks and other safety improvements. As such, a safe walking route to the elementary school would be present for elementary school students from the Project.
All Project access intersections, internal intersections, and internal roadways are anticipated to be carefully designed to ensure they can accommodate emergency vehicles, subject to approval of the City of Clovis. All intersections and street sections would be reviewed by the City of Clovis and designed to comply with typical City standards.
Additionally, the proposed Project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, substantially increase hazards due to a geometric feature, or result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would be less than significant relative to this topic.
710
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
SOURCE: Clovis General Plan, August 2014
N
I:\DNV2201\GIS\Reports\fig3-D_Rdwy Classifica�on_Clovis.ai (12/16/2022) FIGURE 3.13-1
City of Clovis Roadway Classifica�on
Shepherd North Project
Transportation Impact Analysis
711
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
712
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
SOURCE: Clovis Ac�ve Transporta�on Plan Update 2022 -Public Review Dra� N
I:\DNV2201\GIS\Reports\fig4-4_Ex_Bike_Clovis.ai (2/8/2023) FIGURE 3.13-2
City of Clovis Exis�ng Bicycle Facili�es
Shepherd North Project
Transportation Impact Analysis
713
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
714
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
SOURCE: Clovis Ac�ve Transporta�on Plan Update 2022 -Public Review Dra� N
I:\DNV2201\GIS\Reports\fig3-F_Bike_Proposed_Clovis.ai (12/16/2022) FIGURE 3.13-3
City of Clovis Proposed Bicycle Facilities
Shepherd North Project
Transportation Impact Analysis
715
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
716
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
SOURCE: Clovis Ac�ve Transporta�on Plan Update 2022 -Public Review Dra� N
I:\DNV2201\GIS\Reports\fig3-G_Ex_Sidewalks_Clovis.ai (12/16/2022) FIGURE 3.13-4
City of Clovis Exis�ng Sidewalks Facili�es
Shepherd North Project
Transportation Impact Analysis
717
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
718
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
(10%)
(12%) (25%) (38%)
(1%) (2%) (1%) (13%) (25%)
12% 1% 25% 38% 2%
12 3 4 5 6
(17%)
(1%) (1%) (2%) (19%) 1% (1%)
1% 1% 2% 2% 19% 1%
78 910 11 12
7% (42%)
(10%) 7%
21% 1% (1%) (7%)
42% (15%)
13 14 15 16 17 18
1% (6%) (17%)
10%
19 20 21 22 23 24
15%
7% 1%
52% 9%
(7%)
25 26
FIGURE 3.13-5
XX% (YY%)
Inbound (Outbound) Distribution Shepherd North Project
Project Driveway Transportation Impact Analysis
Project Trip Distribution
Willow Avenue/Behymer AvenueClovis Avenue/Nees Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Behymer Avenue
17%
3%
Stanford Avenue-Project Driveway 4/Perrin Road Project Driveway 3/Shepherd Avenue State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue
Clovis Avenue/Teague Avenue
23%
(2%)
(23%)
Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
25%
Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
13%
Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue
(10%)
Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
2%
10% (23%)
(19%)
(3%)
(1%)
10%
1%
(9%)
(1%)
Fowler Avenue/Teague Avenue
14%
Fowler Avenue/Nees Avenue Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Westbound Ramps (23%)
23%
14%
15%
(15%)
23% 4% Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue State Route 168 Westbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue (4%)
(1%)
(9%)
Clovis Avenue/Alluvial Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Teague Avenue Fowler Avenue/Behymer Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue Fowler Avenue/Ticonderoga Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 1
9%
6%
Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 2
15%
17%
Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps
14%
(14%)
14%
4%
(52%)
(15%)
(14%)
1%
(14%)
(1%)
(10%)
(4%)
(15%)
10%
(21%)
(4%)
(7%)
Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
15%
P:\DNV2201\Traffic\z45_Dist.xlsx 2/9/2023
719
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
720
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
32 / 21
38 / 25 79 / 53 120 / 81
3 / 2 6 / 4 3 / 2 41 / 28 79 / 53
13 / 43 1 / 4 27 / 89 41 / 136 2 / 7
12 3 4 5 6
54 / 36
3 / 2 3 / 2 6 / 4 60 / 40 1 / 4 3 / 2 1 / 4 1 / 4 2 / 7 2 / 7 21 / 68 1 / 4
78 910 11 12
8 / 25 132 / 89
32 / 21 8 / 25
23 / 75 1 / 4 3 / 2 22 / 15
46 / 150 47 / 32
13 14 15 16 17 18
1 / 4 19 / 13 54 / 36
11 / 36
19 20 21 22 23 24
16 / 54
8 / 25 1 / 4
57 / 186 10 / 32
22 / 15
25 26
FIGURE 3.13-6
XXX / YYYAM / PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Shepherd North Project Project Driveway Transportation Impact Analysis
Project Trip Assignment
State Route 168 Westbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue
State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue 44 / 30
44 / 30
1 / 4
16 / 54
Clovis Avenue/Alluvial Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Behymer Avenue 47 / 32
15 / 50
3 / 2
Sunnyside Avenue/Teague Avenue Fowler Avenue/Behymer Avenue Fowler Avenue/Ticonderoga 32 / 21
Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue
3 / 2
Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue
47 / 32
16 / 54
44 / 30
164 / 110
Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
4 / 14
13 / 8
15 / 50
66 / 45
13 / 8
22 / 15
15 / 50
4 / 14
Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Westbound Ramps
11 / 36
Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
16 / 54
28 / 19
19 / 61
Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps
25 / 82
60 / 40
25 / 82
19 / 61
11 / 36
1 / 4 72 / 49
Fowler Avenue/Teague Avenue Fowler Avenue/Nees Avenue
47 / 32
32 / 21
Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
2 / 7
11 / 36 72 / 49 Willow Avenue/Behymer Avenue Clovis Avenue/Teague Avenue 25 / 82
6 / 4
72 / 49
Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
27 / 89
Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
14 / 46
Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue
3 / 11
9 / 6
3 / 2
Project Driveway 3/Shepherd Avenue
Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 1
13 / 8
Stanford Avenue-Project Driveway 4/Perrin Road
10 / 32
7 / 21
15 / 50
Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 2
28 / 19
3 / 2
P:\DNV2201\Traffic\z45_Assign.xlsx 2/9/2023
721
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
722
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
123456
7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26
FIGURE 3.13-7
Legend
Signal Free right‐turn Project Driveway
Recommended Improvements Shepherd North Project
Stop Sign Right‐turn overlap Optimize Signal Timing Transportation Impact AnalysisDefacto right turn Yield Install Traffic Signal Existing Plus Project with Improvements Study Intersection Geometrics and Traffic Control Fowler Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Westbound Ramps
Fowler Avenue/State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 1 Sunnyside Avenue/Project Driveway 2 Minnewawa Avenue/Behymer Avenue Minnewawa Avenue/Shepherd Avenue Clovis Avenue/Shepherd Avenue Clovis Avenue/Teague Avenue State Route 168 Westbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue State Route 168 Eastbound Ramps/Herndon Avenue Clovis Avenue/Herndon Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Behymer Avenue
Sunnyside Avenue/Nees Avenue Fowler Avenue/Behymer Avenue Fowler Avenue/Ticonderoga
Willow Avenue/Behymer Avenue Willow Avenue/Shepherd Avenue
Clovis Avenue/Nees Avenue Clovis Avenue/Alluvial Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Shepherd Avenue Sunnyside Avenue/Teague Avenue
Project Driveway 3/Shepherd Avenue Stanford Avenue-Project Driveway 4/Perrin RoadFowler Avenue/Teague Avenue Fowler Avenue/Nees Avenue D
F
O
Y
F
F
F
D
D
P:\DNV2201\Traffic\g‐45_Geo_Exist WP_Impro.xlsx 2/14/2023 723 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.13-40 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North This page intentionally left blank.
724
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
UTILITIES 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North 3.14-1 This section describes the regulatory setting, impacts associated with wastewater services, water services, storm drainage, and solid waste disposal that are likely to result from Project implementation, and measures to reduce potential impacts to wastewater, water supplies, storm drainage, and solid waste facilities. Information in this section is derived primarily from:
• City of Clovis Urban Water Management Plan 2020 Update (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B); • City of Clovis Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020 Update (Provost & Pritchard, 2021A); • City of Clovis Wastewater Master Plan Update Phase 3 (Provost & Pritchard, 2017); • City of Clovis Recycled Water Master Plan (Provost & Pritchard, 2017); • City of Clovis Water Master Plan Update Phase III (Provost & Pritchard, 2017); • 2014 Master Service Plan Update (City of Clovis, 2014); • Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group. 2022. Water Supply Assessment, Northwest Sphere of Influence Expansion Area;
• Fresno- Clovis Storm Water Quality Management Program (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control, 2013).
There were several comments received during the NOP scoping process related to this environmental topic. Two members of the public are concerned about water supply, reliability, and availability with regards to private groundwater wells. Both the Fresno Irrigation District and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District provided comments as well, addressing water usage and stormwater management, respectively. These concerns have been addressed below.
3.14.1 WASTEWATER SUPPLY
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A large portion of the City of Clovis' wastewater is treated at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), located southwest of the City of Fresno. It is approximately 16 miles by trunk sewer to the City of Clovis. Currently, the water is treated to the secondary level and then some is spread in percolation ponds and some is used directly on non-food crops. The plant can utilize extraction wells on the treatment plant property to pump water to reduce groundwater mounding under the plant. The pumped water can then be put into Dry Creek and the Houghton Canal for use by farmers downstream. FID in exchange can provide the City of Fresno approximately one AF of surface water for each two AF of water pumped and put into the canals, which is designated to be used as recharge on the east side of the District. Because Clovis contributes a percentage of the flow to the plant and pays a percentage share of maintenance, operations, and capital improvement costs, Clovis is also entitled to a proportionate share of any exchanged water and will be meeting with the City of Fresno and FID to discuss how to obtain said water. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
Wastewater Collection System
The City’s wastewater collection system is divided into seven major service areas. These seven major wastewater service areas also represent the City’s entire water service area. Under existing conditions, the Herndon, Fowler, Sierra, and Peach service areas discharge into the City’s regional 725
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.14 UTILITIES
3.14-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North trunks, which convey flows to the RWRF. Flow from the remaining three service areas (Northwest, Northeast, and Southeast) are conveyed to the Sewer Treatment - Water Reuse Facility (ST-WRF).
According to the 2017 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, the City currently generates an Average Daily Flow of 7.018 million gallons per day (mgd) (7,861 Acre-Feet per Year (AFY)). In 2020, approximately 5.547 mgd (6,213 AFY) was conveyed to the RWRF, while 2.229 mgd (2,496 AFY) was treated at the ST-WRF; a total average daily flow of 7.775 mgd (8,710 AFY). (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
The City is exploring ways to recover the treated effluent either directly through a recycled water pipeline project or indirectly through exchanges.
Wastewater Treatment
Through a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Fresno, the City of Clovis conveys much of its wastewater to the RWRF and is entitled to a maximum capacity of 9.3 mgd. The RWRF is operated by the City of Fresno and currently has a maximum capacity of 80 mgd. If required, the City has the capability to acquire additional capacity at the RWRF. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
The City constructed a ST-WRF, which began service in 2009. The ST-WRF produces a disinfected tertiary treated water supply. The plant serves the new growth areas of the City in the Southeast, Northwest, and ultimately the Northeast Urban Centers. The ST-WRF is located on Ashlan Avenue, approximately 600 feet west of McCall Avenue. The facility was designed to treat an average daily flow of 2.8 million gallons per day (3,136 AFY) of wastewater. The plant is designed to accommodate future expansion and will ultimately treat 8.4 million gallons per day (9,400 AFY). In 2020, approximately 2,496 Acre-feet (AF) of wastewater was treated at the ST-WRF and 6,213 AF was treated at the RWRF. Of the 2,496 AF treated at the ST-WRF, 710 AF was used within the service area, while the remainder was discharged. (Provost & Pritchard, 2021B).
RECYCLED WATER
Currently, recycled water is used for irrigation of mostly public and some private landscape within the service area. 574 AF of recycled water was used in 2020 to irrigate landscape, while 136 AF was used for agricultural irrigation. Current areas receiving recycled water include Freeway 168 between Shepherd Avenue and Sierra Avenue, Clovis Community Medical Center, and multiple City parks and landscape areas.
Landscape irrigation will continue to be the main use of recycled water in the future for the City. All public landscape areas within three-quarters of a mile of the distribution system are considered potential recycled water use areas. Clovis Unified School District is evaluating the use of recycled water for its landscape areas. Caltrans has expanded their use of recycled water along Freeway 168 from Armstrong Avenue west to Sierra Avenue. This increase in volume and expansion of uses is expected to increase due to proactive actions taken by the City, which are described in a subsequent section. The City is very interested in exploring the use of recycled water for groundwater recharge.
The water could be provided to recharge facilities during periods when no raw water supplies are available or to supplement raw water supplies.
726
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
UTILITIES 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.14-3 Recycled water produced by the tertiary treatment plant is used for agricultural purposes when excess water is available. The City currently has a farmer adjacent to the ST-WRF that uses surplus recycled water to irrigate agricultural crops. The crops to be irrigated include almonds, citrus, and alfalfa. Farmers in the International Water District area are also interested in utilizing the water to irrigate crops which mainly are citrus. Currently, this area is not in the City’s service area. Excess recycled water supplies are currently discharged to Fancher Creek and conveyed through irrigation canals to agricultural lands southwest of Clovis, or to the Little Dry Creek Diversion channel.
There are currently no wildlife habitat areas or wetlands within the Clovis service area. Potentially, the water discharged to FID could be used for wetlands or wildlife habitat enhancement areas.
The water could also potentially be used by future industrial customers within the new growth areas of the City; however, it will depend on their needs and their proximity to the recycled water transmission and distribution lines. At this point none have been specifically identified.
REGULATORY SETTING
Clean Water Act (CWA) / National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits
The CWA is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.” The CWA regulates discharges from “non-point source” and traditional “point source” facilities, such as municipal sewage plants and industrial facilities. Section 402 of the Act creates the NPDES regulatory program, which makes it illegal to discharge pollutants from a point source to the waters of the United States without a permit. Point sources must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority (usually a state, sometimes EPA, a tribe, or a territory). NPDES permits cover industrial and municipal discharges, discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, stormwater associated with numerous kinds of industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than one acre, mining operations, and animal feedlots and aquaculture facilities above certain thresholds.
Permit requirements for treatment are expressed as end-of-pipe conditions. This set of numbers reflects levels of five key parameters: (1) biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), (2) total suspended solids (TSS), (3) pH acid/base balance, (4) Ammonia, and (5) Nitrate. These levels can be achieved by well-operated sewage plants employing "secondary" treatment with denitrification. Primary treatment involves screening and settling, while secondary treatment uses biological treatment in the form of "activated sludge." Denitrification uses the activated sludge process to remove nitrogen from the wastewater.
727
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.14 UTILITIES
3.14-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North All so-called "indirect" dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. An indirect discharger is one that sends its wastewater into a city sewer system, so it eventually goes to a sewage treatment plant. Although not regulated under NPDES, "indirect" discharges are covered by another CWA program called pretreatment. "Indirect" dischargers send their wastewater into a city sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering surface water.
The City’s current Waste Discharge Requirements and Master Recycling Permit, which regulates the wastewater effluent quantity and quality upon discharge, was issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and is Order R5-2019-0021 NPDES No. CA0085235.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is California’s statutory authority for the protection of water quality. Under the Porter-Cologne Act, the State is required to adopt policies, plans, and objectives that will protect the State’s waters for the use by and enjoyment of Californians. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has the authority and responsibility for establishing policy related to the State’s water quality. Regional authority is delegated by the SWRCB to a Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Porter-Cologne Act authorizes the SWRCB and RWQCB to issue NPDES permits.
Under the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) NPDES permit system, all existing and future municipal and industrial discharges to surface water within the City would be subject to regulation. NPDES permits are required for operators of municipal separate storm sewer systems, construction projects, and industrial facilities. These permits contain limits on the amount of pollutants that can be contained in each facility’s discharge.
City of Clovis General Plan
Policies: Land Use Element
• Policy 3.5 Fiscal sustainability. The City shall require establishment of community facility districts, lighting and landscaping maintenance districts, special districts, and other special funding or financing tools in conjunction with or as a condition of development, building or permit approval, or annexation or sphere of influence amendments when necessary to ensure that new development is fiscally neutral or beneficial.
Policies: Public Facilities & Services Element
• Policy 1.1 New development. New development shall pay its fair share of public facility and infrastructure improvements.
• Policy 1.3 Annexation. Prior to annexation, the city must find that adequate water supply and service and wastewater treatment and disposal capacity can be provided for the proposed annexation. Existing water supplies must remain with the land and be transferred to the City upon annexation approval.
• Policy 1.4 Development-funded facilities. The City may require developments to install onsite or offsite facilities that are in excess of a development’s fair share. However, the City shall establish a funding mechanism for future development to reimburse the original 728
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
UTILITIES 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report –Shepherd North 3.14-5 development for the amount in excess of the fair share costs. • Policy 1.6 Master plans. Periodically update water, recycled water, wastewater, and stormwater master plans and require all new development to be consistent with the current master plans.
• Policy 1.8 Water facility protection. Protect existing and future water, wastewater, and recycled water facilities from encroachment by incompatible land uses that may be allowed through discretionary land use permits or changes in land use or zoning designations.
Policies: Environmental Safety Element
• 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.
City of Clovis Municipal Code
Municipal Code Chapter 3.10 Development Impact Fees, The purpose of this chapter is to establish a uniform set of procedures applicable to AB 1600 development impact fees that are adopted pursuant to the authority set forth in Government Code Section 66000 et seq. and the Municipal Code. These procedures are intended to apply to all AB 1600 development impact fees adopted by the City regardless of whether there is an existing similar provision in the applicable chapter or section of the Municipal Code establishing the fee. If there is a conflict between this chapter and an existing similar provision in the applicable chapter or section of the Municipal Code establishing the fee, the provisions of this chapter shall control.
Municipal Code Chapter 6.4 pertains to Sewage Disposal regulations. This chapter establishes the sewer connections and permits required to safely create a functioning sewer system both in tandem with the City system, and outside the City. This Chapter also establishes sewer service charges and fees. Chapter 6.8, Recycled Water Use, provides for and encourages the use of recycled water in a manner that ensures the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents pursuant to and consistent with all applicable laws including, but not limited to, the California Code of Regulations Title 17 and 22.
The City Municipal Code also contains Chapter 8.6, Plumbing Code. This Chapter adopts the California Plumbing Code and includes specific amendments.
Clovis Wastewater Master Plan (2017)
The Clovis Wastewater Master Plan Update, Phase 3 was adopted in 2017. The Wastewater Master Plan Update process consisted generally of developing design criteria, defining wastewater service areas, developing wastewater flow projections, analyzing and designing collection system pipelines, and summarizing results. The Wastewater Master Plan Update, Phase 3, (2017 Master Plan) is the latest phase of an effort begun in 1995 to update the City’s Wastewater Master Plan. The preceding phase, referred to as the Wastewater Master Plan Update, Phase 2, (2008 Master Plan) was documented in a final report dated June 30, 2008. Under the 2017 Master Plan, the core of the City 729
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.
3.14 UTILITIES
3.14-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – Shepherd North is planned to discharge to regional trunk sewers and on to the Fresno-Clovis RWRF in southwest Fresno.
Clovis Recycled Water Master Plan (2017)
The City of Clovis released a Recycled Water Master Plan in 2017. This Plan demonstrates how the water systems in the City will accommodate future population growth. Due to the impact of a fiveyear drought throughout the State, the scarcity of water supplies has resulted in significant motivation to continue investment in the use of recycled water to meet water demands. The purpose of the Clovis Recycled Water Master Plan Update is to evaluate current recycled water use, identify additional market opportunities as defined in the adopted General Plan and produce an implementation plan incorporating recycled water as a significant portion of the Clovis’ water supply. The efficient use of surface water and groundwater resources is critical to maintaining sustainability of communities throughout the Central Valley. To help alleviate potable water demands placed on these supplies, recycled water is a key source of supply many communities, including Clovis, utilize to enhance management of local water resources.