Agenda packet — Clovis City Council, April 15, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

April 15, 2024 - 1 - 3:41 PM A G E N D A • C I T Y C O U N C I L M E E T I N G

April 15, 2024 6:00 PM Council Chamber

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

The Clovis City Council meetings are open to the public at the physical address listed above. There are numerous ways to participate in the City Council meetings: you are able to attend in person; you may submit written comments as described below; and you may view the meeting which is webcast and accessed at www.cityofclovis.com/agendas.

Written Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Council Chamber, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 324-2060 www.cityofclovis.com
1 April 15, 2024 - 2 - 3:41 PM

CALL TO ORDER

FLAG SALUTE - Councilmember Bessinger

ROLL CALL

PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation of Updated Fresno County Clovis Regional Library Elevations.

2. Presentation of Proclamation Declaring April 26, 2024, as Arbor Day.

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

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

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

3. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the April 8, 2024, Council Meeting.

4. Administration – Approval – Award the Request for Proposals and approve the purchase of twenty-two (22) Mobile Data Computers to Stommel, Inc., dba Lehr Auto for $102,025.66 plus tax.

5. Finance – Receive and File – Investment Report for the Month of November 2023.

6. Finance – Receive and File – Treasurer’s Report for the Month of November 2023.

7. Finance – Receive and File – Investment Report for the Month of December 2023.

8. Finance – Receive and File – Treasurer’s Report for the Month of December 2023.

9. Finance – Approval – Res. 24-___, A Resolution of the Clovis City Council Dissolution of the Community Facilities District 2004-1 Oversight Committee.

10. General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim by Candace Smith.

11. Planning and Development Services - Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 15 -03 Landmark Square

12. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 23 -03, Willow Avenue Street Improvements to Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez in the amount of $1,058,995.50; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.
2 April 15, 2024 - 3 - 3:41 PM

13. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 23 -11, Alley Improvements to Dave Christian Construction in the amount of $636,931; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City, and Approval – Res. 24-___, amending the 2023-2024 Community Investment Program Budget for Sewer Capital Projects - Enterprise in the amount of $190,000.

14. Planning and Development Services - Approval – Res. 24 -___, Annexation of Miscellaneous Properties to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. (Councilmember Bessinger has a conflict of interest on this item)

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

15. Consider items associated with approximately 1.62 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues. Harpreet Singh Sumal, owner/applicant; Kelsey George of Precision Civil Engineering, representative.

a. Consider Introduction - Res. 24 -___, A resolution to approve an environmental finding of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 2023-002 and Rezone 2023-002.

b. Consider Introduction - Res. 24 -___, GPA2023 -002, A resolution to amend the General Plan as part of the Second General Plan Amendment Cycle of 2024, re - designating the subject property from the Low Density Residential (2.1 -4.0 dwelling units per acre) a nd Open Space designations to the High Density Residential (15.1 -

30.0 dwelling units per acre) designation.

c. Consider Introduction - Ord. 24-___, R2023-002, An ordinance to rezone the subject property from the R -A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density) Zone District to the R-3 (Multifamily High Density Residential) Zone District.

Staff: McKencie Perez, MPA, Senior Planner
Recommendation: Approve

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

16. Consider Approval – Res. 24-___, A Resolution Declaring the Intention to levy and collect assessments for Fiscal Year 2024 -25, Authorizing the City of Clovis Engineering Division to conduct a property owner Proposition 218 proceeding, Approving the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Preliminary Engineer’s Report, and setting a Public Hearing for June 17, 2024, or at such time thereafter for Area 1 of Benefit Assessment District No. 95-1 (Blackhorse Estates).

Staff: Sean Smith, Supervising Civil Engineer
Recommendation: Approve

3 April 15, 2024 - 4 - 3:41 PM

17. Consider Approval - Res. 24-___, Approving the Sale and Transfer of interest in K & M Casinos, Inc., (500 Club Casino located at 771 W. Shaw Ave, Clovis, CA 93612) from Michael Leblanc to Richard Barclay and Mark English.

Staff: John Holt, City Manager
Recommendation: Approve

COUNCIL ITEMS

18. Consider Approval – Various Actions Associated with the Personnel Commission and Planning Commission.

Staff: John Holt, City Manager
Recommendation: Approve

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS

COUNCIL COMMENTS

CLOSED SESSION - A “closed door” (not public) City Council meeting, allowed by State law, for consideration of pending legal matters and certain matters related to personnel and real estate transactions.

19. Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2)

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
Anticipated litigation: One potential case

RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

FUTURE MEETINGS

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

May 6, 2024 (Mon.)
May 13, 2024 (Mon.)
May 20, 2024 (Mon.)
June 4, 2024 (Mon.)
June 11, 2024 (Mon.)
June 18, 2024 (Mon.)

4 TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Presentation of Updated Fresno County Clovis Regional Library Elevations.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Updated Clovis Regional Library Elevations

Renee Mathis will give a verbal presentation on this item. Please direct questions to the City Manager’s office at 559-324-2060.
5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

Attachment 1

6 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.
7 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

Page 1 of 4 ends

CLOVIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING

April 8, 2024 6:00 P.M. Council Chamber

Meeting called to order by Mayor Ashbeck at 6:00
Flag Salute led by Councilmember Basgall

Roll Call: Present: Councilmembers, Basgall, Bessinger & Mouanoutoua Mayor Ashbeck

Absent: Councilmember Pearce

Presentation – 6:02

6:02 – ITEM 1 - PRESENTATION OF PROC LAMATION TO THE CLOV IS RODEO ASSOCIATION HONORING THE 110TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CLOVIS RODEO.

PUBLIC COMMENTS – 6:14

Robert H iguera commented on the property management and conditions of the Silver Ridge apartments.

A resident commented on the property management of the Silver Ridge apartments.

Jerry commented on the property management and conditions of the Silver Ridge apartments.

Mikayla Silva, a student at Clovis Community College expressing gratitude for the community support of the Clovis Community College Speech and Debate Team and announced the team won the national championship.

CONSENT CALENDAR – 6:27

Motion by Councilmember Bessinger, seconded by Councilmember Basgall, that the items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Motion carried 4-0-1 with Councilmember Pearce Absent.

2. Administration - Approved - Minutes from the March 18, 2024, Council Meeting.

3. Administration – Approved – Award the Request for Proposals (RFP) and approve the purchase of Cisco Network Hardware to Axelliant, LLC, for $83,584.37.

4. Administration - Approved – Award the Request for Proposals (RFP) and approve the purchase of the Uni nterruptible Power Supply (UPS) System for the Public Safety HQ building to Sacramento Computer Power, Inc., for $317,052.96.

5. Administration - Approved - City of Clovis Development Impact Fee Deferral Program and Guidelines.

6. General Services - Approved – Res. 24-31, General Services Budget Amendment to reflect $1,131,630.00 in California Energy Commission loan funding for the solar panel project on Fire Station 6 and the Landmark Square Senior Center and Transit buildings. 8 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

Page 2 of 4 ends

7. General Services - Approved - Res. 24 -32, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification and Compensation Plans to Revise the Business Workflow Analyst Classification with a Salary Range of $8,769 to $10,658 per month.

8. General Services – Approved - Claim Rejection of the G eneral Liability Claim by Cibele Nascimento.

9. General Services – Approved - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim submitted by Braulio Paulino.

10. General Services – Approved – Res. 24 -33, Authorizing Amendments to the City’s Classification Plan by Revising the Firefighter Classification in the Fire Department.

11. General Services – Approved – Res. 24-34, Authorizing the Execution of the Certificates of Assurances for the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP), and Submittal of One (1) Project for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.

12. General Services - Approved – Res. 24 -35, Amending the City’s FY 23 -24 Position Allocation Plan by deleting one (1) Staff Analyst position and adding one (1) Administrative Assistant position within the Fire Department.

13. Planning and Development Services – Approved – Bid Award for CIP 17-18 Senior Center- Façade Modification to Geometric Construction, Inc., for $129,309.70; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City, and Approv ed - Res. 24-36, amending the 2023-2024 Community Investment Program.

14. Planning and Development Services - Approved - Bid Award for CIP 24 -01, Rubberized Cape Seal 2024 to VSS International, Inc., for $2,050,120.00; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City.

15. Public Utilities – Approved – Waive Formal Bidding Requirements and Authorize the Purchase of a 2024 Ford F750 Super Duty Truck from Tom’s Truck Center in the Amount of $124,679.04.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS – 6:28

6:28 ITEM 16 - APPROVED – BID AWARD FOR CIP 23-16, GOULD CANAL TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO ESLI CK CONSTRUCTION, INC ., IN THE TOTAL AMOU NT OF $155,348.00; AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTR ACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY; AND RECEIVE AND FILE – PRESENTATION ON THE GOULD CANAL TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS.

Adam Claes, Fresno Irrigation District representative spoke in support of the project.

Bill Scott, resident commented in support of the project.

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

6:45 ITEM 17 - CONSIDER AND PROVIDE DIRECTION – RESULTS OF THE AKEL

ENGINEERING GROUP ANALYSIS OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS WATER MASTER PLAN PROJECT COST ESTIMATES.

9 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

Page 3 of 4 ends

Presentation provided by the Akel Engineering Group on the City of Clovis Master Plan project cost estimates.

Mike Prandini, representative of the Fresno/Clovis Building Industry Association commented on the presentation expressing concerns on the estimates provided.

Darrius Assemi, rep resentative of Granville Homes commented on the presentation and the associated costs of development.

Julia Kutcka, representative of De Young Homes commented on the potential for Community Facilities Districts to finance the needed infrastructure.

7:45 ITEM 18 - APPROVED - RES. 24-37, APPROVING THE CREA TION OF THE CITY OF

CLOVIS HOUSING TRUST FUND AND AUTHORIZE THE HOUSING TRUST FU ND TO HOLD TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY.

Motion for approval by Councilmember Basgall, seconded by Councilmember Bessinger.

Motion carried 4-0-1 with Councilmember Pearce Absent.

COUNCIL ITEMS – 8:00

8:00 ITEM 19 - APPROVED – VISION, MISSION, AND GOALS.

Motion for approval by Councilmember Bessinger, seconded by Councilmember Basgall.

Motion carried 4-0-1 with Councilmember Pearce Absent.

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS – 8:06

COUNCIL COMMENTS – 8:07

CLOSED SESSION – 8:15

ITEM 20 - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNCIL - EXISTING LITIGATIO N WORKERS COMPENSATI ON CASE REGARDS TO: JOHN

MCGRORY

ITEM 21 - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR PROPERTY: 1625 SHAW AVENUE, C LOVIS, CA AGENCY NEG OTIATOR(S):

ANDY HAUSSLER, ASSIS TANT CITY MANAGER; J OHN HOLT, CITY MANAG ER; SHONNA HALTERMAN, GENERAL S ERVICES DIRECTOR NEGOTIATING PA RTY: COLLIERS REPRESENTING THE JAM ISON TRUST UNDER NEGOTIATION: P RICE AND TERMS OF

PAYMENT

10 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

Page 4 of 4 ends

RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION – 8:40 No reportable action taken.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Ashbeck adjourned the meeting of the Council to April 15, 2024

Meeting adjourned: 8:40 p.m.

______________________________ ________________________________ Mayor City Clerk
11 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Administration
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Administration – Approval – Award the Request for Proposals and approve the purchase of twenty-two (22) Mobile Data Computers to Stommel, Inc., dba Lehr Auto for $102,025.66 plus tax.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmembers should consider recusal if a campaign contribution exceeding $250 has been received from the project proponent (developer, applicant, agent, and/or participants) within the preceding 12 months (Government Code 84308).

RECOMMENDATION
For the City Council to Award the Request for Proposals (RFP) and approve the purchase of twenty-two (22) Mobile Data Computers to Stommel, Inc ., dba Lehr Auto for $ 102,025.66 plus tax.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Included in the 2023-2024 Budget are funds to purchase replacement Mobile Data Computers (MDCs). The MDCs increase efficiencies and provide connectivity to various applications and needed information while performing their duties in the field.

Staff went out with a Request for Proposals (RFP) from vendors using the City’s online bidding system in March 2024 and received thirteen responses. Lehr Auto submitted the lowest priced and complete proposal.

BACKGROUND
Every police vehicle and fire engine are outfitted with Mobile Data Computers (MDC) to receive and send information on calls assigned to the officer or fire fighter.

In an effort to better serve the public by keeping officers on the street performing their duties, all MDCs are being standardized to a laptop configuration. This is consistent with what other public safety agencies across the nation have adopted. Utilizing laptop computers have helped achieve the following benefits:

12 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.
 Reduced amount of down time.
 Easier to exchange laptops from one vehicle to the next.  Repair costs have been greatly reduced.
 Has reduced cost of deployment.
 Allowed for consistent environmental conditions for computers.

Staff requested proposals from vendors using the City’s online bidding system on March 18, 2024. The vendors were to provide pricing for the twenty -two (22) MDCs, keyboards/docks, a five-year warranty and shipping.

Staff received thirteen (13) responses including one that was incomplete. In an ‘apples to apples’ comparison of the proposals the pricing, before tax and shipping, was as follows:

Vendor Total
Stommel, Inc., dba Lehr Auto $102,025.66
Southland Technology, Inc. $103,395.16
PCS Mobile $104,769.50
DHE Computer Systems, LLC $111,130.14
Hypertec USA, Inc. $118,668.66
Questivity, Inc. $120,690.02
vPrime Tech, Inc. $121,109.34
Kambrian Corporation $121,934.78
Ingram Technologies, LLC $124,203.20
IT Vision Networks, Inc. $124,484.77
Jaak Tech, LLC $124,938.00
Howard Industries, Inc. $126,302.00

Based on the above comparison, staff is recommending the purchase the Panasonic Toughbook laptops from Stommel, Inc., dba Lehr Auto for an amount of $ 102,025.66 plus tax. Lehr Auto submitted the lowest priced responsible proposal.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are sufficient funds allocated in the Information Technology Division budget for the purchase of these Panasonic Toughbook laptops.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The City has standardized on Panasonic Laptops for vehicles as they have proven to be very reliable and able to stand up to the rigors of the mobile work environment.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
Staff will purchase the budgeted Panasonic Laptops. As the Laptops arrive, they will be set up and installed in the vehicles for immediate use.

Prepared by: Jesse Velez, IT Deputy Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
13 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Finance – Receive and File – Investment Report for the Month of November 2023.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Distribution of Investments

2. Monthly Investment Transactions

3. Certificates of Deposit

4. Municipal Securities

5. Graph of November 30, 2023 Treasury Rates

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Attached is the Investment Report for the month of November 2023. Shown in Attachment 1 is the distribution of investments which lists all the individual securities owned by the City with the book and market values. Book value is the actual price paid for the investment. Market value is the amount that the investment is worth if sold in the open market. The market value (which fluctuates daily) that is used in the report is as of the last working day of the month. Attachment 2 reflects the monthly investment transactions for the month of November 2023. Attachment 3 lists the certificates of deposit. Attachment 4 lists the municipal securities. Attachment 5 is a graph of Treasury rates on November 30, 2023.

The investment of the City’s funds is performed in accordance with the adopted Investment Policy. Funds are invested with the following objectives in mind:

1. Assets are invested in adherence with the safeguards and diversity of a prudent investor.

2. The portfolio is invested in a manner consistent with the primary emphasis on preservation of the principal, while attaining a high rate of return consistent with this guideline. Trading of securities for the sole purpose of realizing trading profits is prohibited.

14 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

3. Sufficient liquidity is maintained to provide a source for anticipated financial obligations as they become due.

4. Investments may be made, consistent with the Investment Policy Guidelines, in fixed income securities maturing in three years or less and can be extended to five years with the City Manager’s approval.

The Finance Department invests the City’s assets with an expectation of achieving a total rate of return at a level that exceeds the annualized rate of return on short -term government guaranteed or insured obligatio ns (90 -day Treasury bills) and to assure that the principal is preserved with minimal risk of depreciation or loss. In periods of rising interest rates, the City of Clovis portfolio return may be less than that of the annualized 90 -day Treasury bill. In periods of decreasing interest rates, the City of Clovis portfolio return may be greater than the annualized 90-day Treasury bill. The current 90 -day Treasury bill rate (annualized) is 5.07%. The rate of return for the City of Clovis portfolio is 3.33%. The goal for the City of Clovis investment return is 120% of the 90 -day Treasury bill rate. The current rate of return is 6 6% of the Treasury bill rate.

In accordance with the Investment Policy, the investment period on each investment does not exceed three years and can be extended to five years with the City Manager’s approval. As of November 2023, the average investment life of the City’s investment portfolio is 1.97 years.

Current Investment Environment and Philosophy
During the month of November 2023, the federal funds rate remained at 5.25% -5.50%. On November 30, 2023, the Treasury yield curve decreased from 3-month to 10-year notes.

Certificates of Deposit (CD’s)
The City purchases both negotiable and non-negotiable Certificates of Deposit (CD’s). Although negotiable CD’s can be traded, it is the City’s policy to buy and hold all CD’s. Negotiable CD’s are held by U.S. Bank, a third party custodian. Non-negotiable CD’s are held in the City’s safe.

Purchases and Maturities
• 3 government securities totaling $3,000,000 were purchased. • 0 government securities were called or matured.
• 4 certificates of deposit totaling $1,000,000 were purchased. • 0 certificates of deposit were called or matured.
• 1 municipal security totaling $760,000 was purchased. • 1 municipal security totaling $3,455,000 matured.

Market Environment
• During November the federal funds rate remained at 5.25%-5.50%. • On November 30 , the yield curve decreased from 3 -month to 10 -year notes. See Attachment 5, Graph of Treasury Rates on November 30, 2023.

Prepared by: Jeffrey Blanks, Deputy Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
15 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

STATED

DAYS TO

MATURITY

NET BOOK MARKET YIELD TO INTEREST INVEST MATURIT Y FROM COST VALUE VALUE * MATURIT Y RATE DATE DATE 11/30/2023

GOV'T SECURITIES
FFCB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,935,900 0.250% 0.250% 03/01/21 03/01/24 92 FHLB 4,998,000 4,999,437 4,972,100 3.276% 3.250% 08/17/22 03/08/24 99 FHLB 1,994,000 1,998,225 1,990,780 3.835% 3.625% 09/14/22 03/08/24 99 FFCB 1,999,000 1,999,844 1,970,280 0.317% 0.300% 03/24/21 03/18/24 109 FHLB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,873,100 0.350% 0.350% 06/07/21 06/07/24 190 FHLB 941,770 973,324 974,340 4.500% 0.700% 11/17/22 06/24/24 207 FHLB 4,969,000 4,987,600 4,803,800 1.274% 1.050% 01/20/22 11/15/24 351 FHLB 1,595,506 1,652,743 1,648,441 4.515% 0.500% 11/16/22 12/30/24 396 FNMA 1,857,400 1,896,088 1,888,040 4.415% 0.500% 03/23/23 02/24/25 452 FNMA 930,300 949,184 944,150 4.338% 0.520% 03/23/23 02/25/25 453 FHLB 932,200 950,517 945,220 4.328% 0.625% 03/23/23 02/27/25 455 FHLB 3,980,000 3,990,566 3,833,920 1.922% 1.750% 02/28/22 02/28/25 456 FHLB 4,000,000 4,000,000 3,874,320 2.750% 2.750% 04/25/22 04/25/25 512 FAMCMTN 3,947,600 3,973,522 3,732,080 1.121% 0.750% 12/16/21 07/28/25 606 FHLB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,891,300 3.600% 3.600% 08/30/22 08/28/25 637 FAMCMTN 4,948,500 4,974,377 4,625,800 0.869% 0.600% 10/14/21 09/08/25 648 FHLB 871,150 884,333 871,587 3.886% 0.500% 04/26/23 11/25/25 726 FHLB 4,963,000 4,980,207 4,571,300 0.750% 0.580% 09/08/21 02/11/26 804 FHLB 3,922,000 3,955,268 3,653,040 1.229% 0.750% 12/16/21 02/24/26 817 FHLB 2,751,000 2,783,959 2,747,100 3.916% 0.790% 05/17/23 03/16/26 837 FFCB 4,967,500 4,980,356 4,516,200 1.075% 0.940% 10/14/21 09/28/26 1,033 FHLB 3,649,200 3,750,760 3,630,120 3.342% 1.150% 06/29/22 10/28/26 1,063 FHLB 5,988,000 5,992,436 5,448,420 1.291% 1.250% 11/24/21 11/24/26 1,090 FHLB 5,127,757 5,083,550 4,667,150 1.580% 2.125% 01/20/22 12/11/26 1,107 FHLB 4,043,250 4,166,232 3,997,446 3.397% 1.020% 06/29/22 02/24/27 1,182 FHLB 4,550,000 4,661,411 4,472,564 3.173% 1.020% 08/17/22 02/24/27 1,182 FHLB 3,695,200 3,788,356 3,688,676 2.564% 0.900% 03/31/22 02/26/27 1,184 FHLB 6,072,400 6,195,689 6,032,667 3.737% 0.900% 01/19/23 02/26/27 1,184 FHLB 5,247,000 5,362,688 5,221,584 4.329% 0.900% 02/16/23 02/26/27 1,184 FHLB 5,050,770 5,173,426 5,078,757 3.971% 1.000% 12/14/22 02/26/27 1,184 FHLB 4,000,000 4,000,000 3,727,440 2.375% 2.375% 03/08/22 03/08/27 1,194 FFCB 5,160,000 5,249,282 5,146,860 3.996% 0.830% 03/23/23 02/22/28 1,545 FFCB 2,123,750 2,124,448 2,148,100 4.812% 1.000% 09/27/23 03/02/28 1,554 FHLB 1,893,209 1,893,209 1,937,076 5.018% 1.000% 10/18/23 03/10/28 1,562 FHLB 3,124,500 3,114,809 3,017,490 3.553% 4.500% 05/17/23 03/10/28 1,562 FFCB 6,102,000 6,093,230 5,852,280 3.501% 3.875% 04/26/23 04/25/28 1,608 FFCB 5,354,250 5,363,175 5,251,345 4.349% 3.740% 06/14/23 04/27/28 1,610 FFCB 2,955,000 2,956,992 2,916,870 4.814% 4.470% 07/12/23 06/22/28 1,666 FHLMC 853,500 853,500 854,760 4.601% 1.100% 11/15/23 07/27/28 1,701 FNMA 848,800 848,800 850,720 4.613% 1.000% 11/15/23 07/28/28 1,702 FHLB 2,981,700 2,981,700 3,044,730 4.892% 4.750% 10/18/23 09/08/28 1,744 FHLMC 842,300 842,300 844,610 4.614% 1.000% 11/15/23 10/19/28 1,785 SECURITIES TOTAL 149,230,511$ 150,425,542 $ 145,092,464 $ LAIF 56,142,817$ 56,142,817 $
Municipal Issuance 53,528,065$ 51,964,707 $
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 22,985,608$ 22,985,608 $ TOTAL CD'S 28,245,000$ 27,693,005 $
TOTAL INVESTMENTS 311,327,032$ 303,878,601 $
* Market values for securities obtained from US Bank.

City of Clovis
Distribution of Investments
As of November 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
16 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

Activity Maturity
Institution Description Activit y Amount Market Value Rate Date Date FHLMC Gov. Sec. Purchase 1,000,000 842,300 1.000% 11/15/23 10/19/28 FHLMC Gov. Sec. Purchase 1,000,000 853,500 1.100% 11/15/23 07/27/28 FNMA Gov. Sec. Purchase 1,000,000 848,800 1.000% 11/15/23 07/28/28 California Health Facs Mun Iss. Purchase 760,000 712,500 3.378% 11/16/23 06/01/28 Bridgewater Bk CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 5.100% 11/03/23 11/03/26 Consumers Fed Cr Un CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 5.000% 11/16/23 11/16/28 Taylorsville Svgs CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 5.100% 11/03/23 11/03/26 Wells Fargo Bnk CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 5.050% 11/14/23 11/14/28 California St Univ Rev Mun Iss. Maturity 3,455,000 3,450,074 0.475% 11/01/23 11/01/23

PORTFOLIO DATA
Current Month (11/23)
Book Market
CD'S 28,245,000 $ 27,693,005 $
Gov't Securities* 150,425,542 145,092,464
Municipal Securities 53,528,065 51,964,707
LAIF 56,142,817 56,142,817
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 22,985,608 22,985,608
TOTAL 311,327,032 $ 303,878,601 $
Prior Month (10/23)
Three Months Previous (08/23)
Book Market Book Market
CD'S 27,245,000 $ 26,545,011 $ CD'S 26,245,000 $ 25,537,294 $ Gov't Securities* 147,880,942 140,544,390 Gov't Securities* 140,516,837 134,028,857 Municipal Securities 56,265,639 54,033,514 Municipal Securities 55,388,719 53,687,790 LAIF 56,142,817 56,142,817 LAIF 55,589,725 55,589,725
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 13,554,212 13,554,212 Sweep Account (Union Bank) 19,571,681 19,571,681 TOTAL 301,088,610 $ 290,819,944 $ TOTAL 297,311,962 $ 288,415,347 $ Six Months Previous (05/23)
One Year Previous (11/22)
Book Market Book Market
CD'S 24,245,000 $ 23,567,537 $ CD'S 19,245,000 $ 18,599,372 $ Gov't Securities* 132,114,241 125,987,536 Gov't Securities* 133,263,676 126,769,132 Municipal Securities 59,415,000 55,307,527 Municipal Securities 51,805,000 47,365,936 LAIF 75,000,000 75,000,000 LAIF 74,905,243 74,905,243
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 34,817,378 34,817,378 Sweep Account (Union Bank) 20,638,225 20,638,225 TOTAL 325,591,619 $ 314,679,978 $ TOTAL 299,857,144 $ 288,277,908 $ *Adjusted Quarterly for Premium/Discount Amortization
As of November 30, 2023
Monthly Investment Transactions
City of Clovis
ATTACHMENT 2
17 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Negotiable CDs COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 11/30/23 FREQUENCY New York Cmnty Bank 250,000 249,625.00 0.350% 12/11/20 12/11/23 11 QUARTERLY Transportation Alliance Bk 250,000 246,387.50 0.250% 03/12/21 03/12/24 103 QUARTERLY Preferred Bank 250,000 245,932.50 0.250% 03/25/21 03/25/24 116 QUARTERLY Bankunited Natl Assn 245,000 240,937.90 0.450% 03/31/21 04/01/24 123 QUARTERLY Greenstate Credit Union 250,000 243,312.50 0.450% 06/16/21 06/17/24 200 QUARTERLY Eaglemark Savings Bank 250,000 242,932.50 0.400% 06/30/21 06/28/24 211 QUARTERLY Texas Exchange Bk 250,000 242,617.50 0.500% 07/09/21 07/09/24 222 QUARTERLY BMW Bk North Amer 250,000 242,005.00 0.550% 07/30/21 07/30/24 243 QUARTERLY Toyota Finl Svgs 250,000 240,865.00 0.650% 09/09/21 09/09/24 284 QUARTERLY State Bk India 250,000 240,600.00 0. 650% 09/17/21 09/17/24 292 QUARTERLY Ubs Bank Usa 250,000 238,740.00 0.750% 11/17/21 11/18/24 354 QUARTERLY Webbank Salt Lake City 250,000 238,427.50 0.750% 11/29/21 11/29/24 365 QUARTERLY Medallion Bank Salt Lake City 250,000 238,137.50 0.900% 12/20/21 12/20/24 386 QUARTERLY Beal Bank 250,000 237,670.00 0.950% 01/19/22 01/15/25 412 QUARTERLY Mountian Amer Fed 250,000 243,830.00 3.450% 08/31/22 02/28/25 456 QUARTERLY Barclays Bk 250,000 238,460.00 1.700% 03/09/22 03/10/25 466 QUARTERLY Goldman Sachs Bk 250,000 238,307.50 1.650% 03/09/22 03/10/25 466 QUARTERLY Safra National Bk 250,000 239,095.00 2.000% 03/23/22 03/24/25 480 QUARTERLY Pentagon Federal Cr Un 250,000 238,942.50 2.000% 03/28/22 03/28/25 484 QUARTERLY Beal Bank 250,000 239,555.00 2.200% 04/06/22 04/02/25 489 QUARTERLY JP Morgan Chase 250,000 240,382.50 2.500% 04/08/22 04/08/25 495 QUARTERLY First Natl Bank 250,000 239,357.50 2.200% 04/12/22 04/11/25 498 QUARTERLY One Community Bank 250,000 240,712.50 2.700% 04/29/22 04/29/25 516 QUARTERLY Americu Credit Union 250,000 241,007.50 2.800% 05/02/22 05/02/25 519 QUARTERLY Synchrony Bank Retail 250,000 241,825.00 3.100% 05/20/22 05/20/25 537 QUARTERLY Connexus Credit Union 250,000 241,402.50 3.000% 05/26/22 05/27/25 544 QUARTERLY Bmo Harris Bank 250,000 241,677.50 3.150% 06/17/22 06/17/25 565 QUARTERLY Saco Biddeford 250,000 240,567.50 2.850% 06/17/22 06/17/25 565 QUARTERLY Baxter Credit Union 250,000 250,000.00 3.400% 06/28/22 06/30/25 578 QUARTERLY Capital One Bank 250,000 242,335.00 3.350% 06/29/22 06/30/25 578 QUARTERLY American First Cr Un 250,000 241,750.00 3.250% 07/15/22 07/15/25 593 QUARTERLY Trustone Financial Cr Un 250,000 241,690.00 3.250% 07/19/22 07/21/25 599 QUARTERLY American Natl Bank 250,000 241,022.50 3.100% 07/27/22 07/28/25 606 QUARTERLY TCM Bank 250,000 242,012.50 3.350% 07/28/22 07/28/25 606 QUARTERLY Generations Bank 250,000 242,180.00 3. 400% 08/03/22 08/04/25 613 QUARTERLY Direct Fed Credit 250,000 241,845.00 3.500% 08/17/22 08/18/25 627 QUARTERLY Resource One Credit 250,000 241,640.00 3.300% 08/17/22 08/18/25 627 QUARTERLY Connext Credit 250,000 242,375.00 3.500% 08/31/22 08/29/25 638 QUARTERLY Skyone Fed Credit 250,000 242,755.00 3.600% 08/30/22 09/02/25 642 QUARTERLY Credit Union of Texas 250,000 242,732.50 3.600% 09/14/22 09/15/25 655 QUARTERLY Forbright Bank 250,000 242,207.50 3.500% 09/16/22 09/16/25 656 QUARTERLY Ally Bank Sandy Utah 250,000 242,610.00 4.050% 09/29/22 09/19/25 659 QUARTERLY Alabama Credit Union 250,000 244,312.50 3.600% 09/20/22 09/22/25 662 QUARTERLY Kemba Finl Credit Union 250,000 244,472.50 4.000% 09/21/22 09/22/25 662 QUARTERLY Farmers Merchants 250,000 243,212.50 3.750% 09/28/22 09/29/25 669 QUARTERLY Jefferson Finl FCU 250,000 244,955.00 4.150% 09/29/22 09/29/25 669 QUARTERLY Dort Finl Credit Union 250,000 244,277.50 4.000% 09/30/22 09/30/25 670 QUARTERLY First National Bank 250,000 243,182.50 3.625% 09/30/22 09/30/25 670 QUARTERLY Numerica Credit Union 250,000 245,580.00 4.200% 09/30/22 09/30/25 670 QUARTERLY Vystar Credit Union 250,000 245,797.50 4.350% 09/30/22 09/30/25 670 QUARTERLY Bell Bank Fargo 250,000 244,872.50 4.150% 10/13/22 10/14/25 684 QUARTERLY Pacific Alliance 250,000 244,872.50 4.200% 10/14/22 10/14/25 684 QUARTERLY z1st Financial Bank 250,000 245,095.00 4.150% 10/13/22 10/17/25 687 QUARTERLY Great Southern Bank 250,000 246,420.00 4.500% 10/20/22 10/20/25 690 QUARTERLY American Bank 250,000 245,675.00 4.350% 10/21/22 10/21/25 691 QUARTERLY Queensborough Natl Bank 250,000 245,295.00 4.100% 10/21/22 10/21/25 691 QUARTERLY Public Alliance Cr Un 250,000 246,410.00 4.500% 10/25/22 10/27/25 697 QUARTERLY First Citizens Bank 250,000 247,227.50 4.700% 10/28/22 10/28/25 698 QUARTERLY LCA Bank Corp 250,000 245,882.50 4.400% 10/28/22 10/28/25 698 QUARTERLY Sharonview Fed Cr Un 250,000 248,682.50 4.850% 10/31/22 10/31/25 701 QUARTERLY City of Clovis
Certificates of Deposit
As of November 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 3
18 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Negotiable CDs COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 11/30/23 FREQUENCY City of Clovis
Certificates of Deposit
As of November 30, 2023
United Heritage Cr Un 250,000 247,575.00 4.700% 11/04/22 11/04/25 705 QUARTERLY Capital One Natl Assn 250,000 248,310.00 4.900% 11/16/22 11/17/25 718 QUARTERLY Morgan Stanley Bank 250,000 248,715.00 5.000% 11/18/22 11/18/25 719 QUARTERLY Spokane Teachers Cr Un 250,000 248,757.50 5.000% 11/23/22 11/23/25 724 QUARTERLY Morgan Stanley Private 250,000 247,465.00 4.750% 12/09/22 12/09/25 740 QUARTERLY Community Bank Topeka 250,000 245,362.50 4.300% 12/14/22 12/15/25 746 QUARTERLY Austin Telco Fed 250,000 248,517.50 4.950% 12/16/22 12/16/25 747 QUARTERLY Rogue Credit Union 250,000 249,232.50 5.100% 12/23/22 12/23/25 754 QUARTERLY Alliant Credit Union 250,000 249,240.00 5.100% 12/30/22 12/30/25 761 QUARTERLY First Technology Fed Cr Un 250,000 249,485.00 5.150% 06/30/23 12/30/25 761 MONTHLY Liberty First Cr Un 250,000 246,507.50 4.550% 01/17/23 01/19/26 781 QUARTERLY Capital Educators Fed Cr 250,000 246,507.50 4.550% 01/19/23 01/20/26 782 QUARTERLY Manufacturers Traders 250,000 245,467.50 4.250% 01/31/23 01/23/26 785 QUARTERLY City Natl Bank 250,000 244,935.00 4.350% 01/25/23 01/26/26 788 QUARTERLY Coastlife Cr Un 250,000 246,955.00 4.650% 02/13/23 02/13/26 806 QUARTERLY Achieve Finl Cr Un 250,000 246,950.00 4.650% 02/17/23 02/17/26 810 QUARTERLY California Cr Un Glendale 250,000 246,040.00 4.500% 02/23/23 02/23/26 816 QUARTERLY Truliant Fed Cr Un 250,000 246,700.00 4.600% 02/28/23 02/27/26 820 QUARTERLY Pioneer Fed Cr Un Mtn Home 250,000 246,690.00 4.600% 02/28/23 03/02/26 823 QUARTERLY Tradition Cap Bankk 250,000 246,390.00 4.600% 03/03/23 03/03/26 824 MONTHLY Alaska Fed Cr 250,000 247,390.00 4.650% 03/05/23 03/09/26 830 MONTHLY Mid Carolina Credit 250,000 248,732.50 4.600% 03/13/23 03/13/26 834 MONTHLY Blue Ridge Bank 250,000 248,715.00 4.500% 03/16/23 03/16/26 837 MONTHLY Northwest Bank 250,000 248,792.50 4.600% 03/17/23 03/17/26 838 MONTHLY Valleystar Credit Union 250,000 248,795.00 4.600% 03/20/23 03/20/26 841 MONTHLY First Community Bank 250,000 248,482.50 4.500% 03/22/23 03/23/26 844 MONTHLY Technology Credit Union 250,000 248,820.00 4.650% 03/23/23 03/23/26 844 MONTHLY Cibc Bank 250,000 248,452.50 4.650% 03/24/23 03/24/26 845 MONTHLY Signature Bank 250,000 248,797.50 4. 500% 03/24/23 03/24/26 845 MONTHLY Point West Credit Union 250,000 248,770.00 5.000% 04/12/23 04/13/26 865 MONTHLY Flagstar Bank 250,000 248,787.50 4.650% 03/30/23 04/24/26 876 MONTHLY Utah Cmnty Credit Union 250,000 246,600.00 4.600% 04/26/23 04/27/26 879 MONTHLY Cross River Bank 250,000 246,787.50 4.650% 05/19/23 05/19/26 901 MONTHLY Raiz FCU 250,000 247,700.00 4.650% 05/24/23 05/26/26 908 MONTHLY Usalliance FCU 250,000 247,115.00 4.700% 05/26/23 05/26/26 908 MONTHLY Chartway Fed Cr Un 250,000 248,290.00 4.900% 06/09/23 06/09/26 922 MONTHLY Customers Bank 250,000 247,087.50 4.700% 06/14/23 06/15/26 928 MONTHLY Latino Cmnty Cr Un 250,000 248,332.50 4.900% 06/27/23 06/29/26 942 MONTHLY Leaders Cr Un 250,000 248,907.50 5.000% 06/30/23 06/30/26 943 MONTHLY Farmers Insurance 250,000 248,935.00 5.000% 07/21/23 07/21/26 964 MONTHLY Maine Svgs FCU 250,000 248,935.00 5.000% 07/21/23 07/21/26 964 MONTHLY Popular Bank New York 250,000 248,075.00 4.850% 09/06/23 09/04/26 1,009 QUARTERLY Freedom Northwest Cr Un 250,000 251,337.50 5.350% 09/19/23 09/18/26 1,023 QUARTERLY Amex National Bank 250,000 249,077.50 5.000% 09/20/23 09/21/26 1,026 QUARTERLY First Gty Bank 250,000 249,740.00 5. 100% 10/13/23 10/13/26 1,048 MONTHLY Bridgewater Bank 250,000 249,792.50 5. 100% 11/03/23 11/03/26 1,069 MONTHLY Taylorsville Svgs Bk 250,000 249,792.50 5.100% 11/ 03/23 11/03/26 1,069 MONTHLY People Bank Co 250,000 247,002.50 4. 650% 03/30/23 03/30/27 1,216 MONTHLY Carroll County 250,000 241,920.00 4.650% 03/30/23 03/30/28 1,582 MONTHLY Discover Bank 250,000 240,387.50 4.350% 04/26/23 04/24/28 1,607 MONTHLY TTCU Fed Cr Un 250,000 246,602.50 5.000% 07/26/23 07/26/28 1,700 MONTHLY Wells Fargo Natl Bk 250,000 247,052.50 5.050% 11/14/23 11/14/28 1,811 MONTHLY Consumers Fed Cr Un 250,000 246,507.50 5.000% 11/16/23 11/16/28 1,813 MONTHLY Negotiable CD TOTAL 28,245,000$ 27,693,005 $
CD TOTAL 28,245,000$ 27,693,005 $
ATTACHMENT 3
19 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Municipal Securities COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 11/30/23 FREQUENCY San Diego CA Convention Ref Bond 1,435,929 1,429,381 1.527% 08/18/22 04/15/24 137 QUARTERLY Santa Ana College Ref Bond 438,735 426,659 0.644% 12/17/21 08/01/24 245 QUARTERLY University CA Rev Bond 985,983 968,500 4.350% 09/15/22 05/15/25 532 QUARTERLY Antelope Valley CA Ref Bond 731,645 709,583 1.767% 05/12/22 08/01/25 610 QUARTERLY Chabot Las Positas Cmnty Clg Bond 1,436, 902 1,388,978 0.880% 04/29/22 08/01/25 610 QUARTERLY Foothill De Anza Bond 786,781 781,243 0.906% 03/24/23 08/01/25 610 QUARTERLY San Dieguito High School Ref Bond 952,381 945,210 1.661% 10/13/22 08/01/25 610 QUARTERLY Santa Ana CCD Ref Bond 239,443 232,518 0.744% 05/12/22 08/01/25 610 QUARTERLY Orange County Water Dist Ref Bond 863,081 856,701 2.095% 10/13/22 08/15/25 624 QUARTERLY San Jose CA Txble Ser B 2,271,085 2,251,215 2.450% 10/13/22 09/01/25 641 QUARTERLY Los Angeles CA USD Ref Bond 1,005,950 909,500 1.455% 11/15/21 07/01/26 944 QUARTERLY Chabot Las Positas Cmnty Clg CA 3,314,277 3,167,293 1.080% 07/27/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY Chaffey CA High School Ref Bond 1,521,019 1,469,754 2.475% 06/30/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY Huntington Beach HS Dist Ref Bond 3,152, 187 2,993,140 1.208% 04/29/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY Placentia Yorba USD Ref Bond 1,054,276 1,004,062 1.070% 05/31/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Cmnty Ref Bond 459,823 439,361 2.299% 04/29/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley CA USD Ref Bond 2,125,000 1,928,693 1.147% 11/03/21 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY Sonoma Cnty Jr College Ref Bond 1,942,267 1,874,540 2.447% 06/30/22 08/01/26 975 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Pub Facs Ref Bond 1,551,549 1, 485,835 1.812% 08/18/22 10/15/26 1,050 QUARTERLY CA ST Univ Rev Ref Bond 2,265,521 2,241,625 1.142% 02/17/23 11/01/26 1,067 QUARTERLY El Dorado CA Irr Dist Ref Bond 1,110,889 1,060,191 1.687% 08/18/22 03/01/27 1,187 QUARTERLY Rancho Santiago Cmnty Clg 295,971 292,308 1.106% 11/17/22 03/01/27 1,187 QUARTERLY University Gen Rev Bond 2,135,398 2,116, 926 1.316% 10/13/22 05/15/27 1,262 QUARTERLY El Monte Ca Ref Bond 538,675 531,138 1.326% 03/24/23 06/01/27 1,279 QUARTERLY Los Angeles CA Dept Wtr Ref Bond 2,103, 176 2,030,840 5.516% 04/27/23 07/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Colton CA Jt Uni Sch 953,851 946,516 1.603% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Contra Costa Ref Bond 827,390 803,510 2.163% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Corona Norco Ref Bond 226,617 227,808 2.297% 09/28/23 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Foothill De Anza CCD 486,760 480,697 1.473% 12/15/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Fremont CA Uni Sch Dist 1,098,295 963,688 1.113% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Fremont CA USD Ref Bond 970,469 1,032,236 2.000% 05/31/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Marin CA Cmnty Clg Dist 320,434 317,885 3.330% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Mount San Antonio Cmnty Clg 250,557 249, 666 1.139% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Mount San Antonio Ref Bond 373,717 370, 749 2.329% 10/13/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Saddleback VY Uni Ref Bond 2,903,148 2,758, 080 2.400% 08/10/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Com CD 551,873 542,558 2.407% 12/15/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley Ref Bond 1,313,764 1,275, 830 3.415% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Santa Monica Cmnty Clg Ref Bond 984,032 953,010 3.050% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Sierra CA Cmnty Clg Dist 410,813 408,479 1.129% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY William Hart CA Un High 176,351 175,436 1.174% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY San Jose CA Txble Ser B 848,277 841,468 2.600% 10/13/22 09/01/27 1,371 QUARTERLY Soquel Creek Cnty Ref Bond 485,471 474,455 1.445% 05/18/23 03/01/28 1,553 QUARTERLY Gardena Calif Pension Oblig 897,610 906,050 2.663% 10/19/23 04/01/28 1,584 QUARTERLY Beverly Hills Ref Bond 559,497 713,404 1.514% 06/15/23 06/01/28 1,645 QUARTERLY California Health FACS 712,500 544,246 3.378% 11/16/23 06/01/28 1,645 QUARTERLY Redondo Beach Ref Bond 571,842 576,680 1.430% 09/28/23 08/01/28 1,706 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley CA Uni 1,596,487 1,586, 694 1.670% 07/13/23 08/01/28 1,706 QUARTERLY Santa Ana College Impt 1,290,372 1,280, 370 1.320% 07/13/23 08/01/28 1,706 QUARTERLY Mun. Securities TOTAL 53,528,065$ 51,964,707 $
Municipal Securities TOTAL 53,528,065$ 51,964,707 $
City of Clovis
Municipal Securities
As of November 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 4
20 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

Treasury Rates as of November 30, 2023
3 month Treasury bill 5.45
6 month Treasury bill 5.38
2 Yr Treasury note 4.73
3 Yr Treasury note 4.48
5 Yr Treasury note 4.31
10 Yr Treasury note 4.37

CITY OF CLOVIS

FINANCE DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER 30, 2023 TREASURY RATES
As indicated in the above graph, treasuries decrease from 3-month to 10-year notes. 0 1
2 3
4 5
6 3 month
Treasury bill
6 month
Treasury bill
2 Yr Treasury
note
3 Yr Treasury
note
5 Yr Treasury
note
10 Yr
Treasury note

INTEREST RATES

TREASURIES
TREASURY RATES ON NOVEMBER 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 5
21 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Finance – Receive and File – Treasurer’s Report for the Month of November 2023.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary of Cash Balances

2. Summary of Investment Activity

3. Investments with Original Maturities Exceeding One Year

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Attached for the Council’s information is the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended November 30, 2023.

Pursuant to Section 41004 of the Government Code of the State of California, the City Treasurer is required to submit a monthly report of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances.

Attachment 1 provides a summary of the beginning balance, total receipts, total disbursements, ending balance for all funds, and a listing, by fund, of all month end fund balances. Attachment 2 summarizes the investment activity for the month and distribution, by type of investment, held by the City. Attachment 3 lists all investments with original maturities exceeding one year as of the month ended November 30, 2023.

Prepared by: Jeffrey Blanks, Deputy Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
22 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Previous Balance 5,128,594.14$
Deposits 34,665,460.16
Disbursements (39,698,806.75)
Current Balance 95,247.55$

FUNDS BALANCE
100 General Fund 2,814,935.42 $
201 Local Transportation 19,977,708.05
202 Parking and Business Improvements 180,723.66
203 Off Highway Use 73,272.86
204 Community Facilities District 2020-1 183,677.08 205 Senior Citizen Memorial Trust 56,140.84
207 Landscape Assessment District 5,896,464.09
208 Blackhorse III (95-1) Assessment District 4,971.17 209 Blackhorse III (95-1) Assessment District 2 19,119.02 275 HCD Block Grant Fund 635,386.85
301 Park & Recreation Acquisition 9,619,007.44
305 Refuse Equipment Reserve 2,442,104.17
310 Special Street Deposit Fund 49,519,930.49
314 Housing Successor Agency 396,196.99
402 1976 Fire Bond Redemption 25,475.23
404 1976 Sewer Bond Redemption Fund 423,214.96
501 Community Sanitation Fund 15,818,191.73
502 Sewer Service Fund 36,948,472.01
504 Sewer Capital Projects-Users 534,677.68
506 Sewer Capital Projects-Developer 6,751,979.20
507 Water Service Fund 44,173,963.21
508 Water Capital Projects-Users 6,210,263.44
509 Water Capital Projects-Developer 12,020,146.30 515 Transit Fund 4,980,883.19
540 Planning & Development Services 15,880,965.05
601 Property & Liability Insurance 228,585.46
602 Fleet Maintenance 23,870,092.36
603 Employee Benefit Fund 9,272,677.99
604 General Government Services 29,926,473.29
605 Facilities Maintenance 3,699,030.77
606 Information Technology 6,448,167.05
701 Curb & Gutter Fund 167,236.09
703 Payroll Tax & Withholding Fund 1,777,185.93
712 Temperance/Barstow Assmt Dist (98-1) 78,895.37 713 Shepherd/Temperance Assmt Dist (2000-1) 5,881.46 715 Supp Law Enforcement Serv 193,551.51
716 Asset Forfeiture 349,304.40
720 Measure A-Public Safety Facility Tax 1,949.98
736 SA Admin Trust Fund 1,421.40
741 SA Debt Service Trust Fund (187,181.14)
747 Housing Successor Trust Fund 1,137.98
SUBTOTALS 311,422,280.03$
999 Invested Funds (311,327,032.48)
TOTAL 95,247.55$
Statement of Cash Balances
As of November 30, 2023
City of Clovis
ATTACHMENT 1
23 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Balance of Investments Previous Month End 301,088,610.43 $ Time Certificates of Deposit Transactions
Investments 1,000,000.00
Withdrawals 0.00
Total CD Changes 1,000,000.00
Other Changes
Government Securities 2,544,600.00
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00
Municipal Securities (2,737,574.00)
Sweep Account 9,431,396.05
Total Other Changes 9,238,422.05
Balance of Investments Current Month End 311,327,032.48$ Insured CD's 28,245,000.00
Government Securities 150,425,542.35
US Treasury Notes 0.00
Local Agency Investment Fund 56,142,817.04
Municipal Securities 53,528,064.55
Sweep Account 22,985,608.54
Investment Total 311,327,032.48$
For the month of November 30, 2023
City of Clovis
Distribution of Investments
As of November 30, 2023
City of Clovis
Summary of Investment Activity
ATTACHMENT 2
24 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Investment
Balance At Stated
Institution Face Value Amortized Cost Maturity Rate
FFCB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 3/1/2024 0.250%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,999,437 3/8/2024 3.250%
FFCB 2,000,000.00 1,998,225 3/8/2024 3.625%
FHLB 2,000,000.00 1,999,844 3/18/2024 0.300%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 6/7/2024 0.350%
FHLB 1,000,000.00 973,324 6/24/2024 0.700%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,987,600 11/15/2024 1.050%
FHLB 1,735,000.00 1,652,743 12/30/2024 0.500%
FNMA 2,000,000.00 1,896,088 2/24/2025 0.500%
FNMA 1,000,000.00 949,184 2/25/2025 0.520%
FHLB 1,000,000.00 950,517 2/27/2025 0.625%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,990,566 2/28/2025 1.750%
FAMCMTN 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 4/25/2025 2.750%
FAMCMTN 4,000,000.00 3,973,522 7/28/2025 0.750%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 8/28/2025 3.600%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,974,377 9/8/2025 0.600%
FHLB 980,000.00 884,333 11/25/2025 0.500%
FFCB 5,000,000.00 4,980,207 2/11/2026 0.580%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,955,268 2/24/2026 0.750%
FHLB 3,000,000.00 2,783,959 3/16/2026 0.790%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,980,356 9/28/2026 0.940%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,750,760 10/28/2026 1.150%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,992,436 11/24/2026 1.250%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,083,550 12/11/2026 2.125%
FHLB 4,500,000.00 4,166,232 2/24/2027 1.020%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,661,411 2/24/2027 1.020%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,788,356 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 6,800,000.00 6,195,689 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 5,700,000.00 5,362,688 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,173,426 2/26/2027 1.000%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 3/8/2027 2.375%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,249,282 2/22/2028 0.830%
FFCB 2,500,000.00 2,124,448 3/2/2028 1.000%
FHLB 3,000,000.00 3,114,809 3/10/2028 4.500%
FFCB 2,245,000.00 1,893,209 3/10/2028 1.000%
FFCB 6,000,000.00 6,093,230 4/25/2028 3.875%
FFCB 5,500,000.00 5,363,175 4/27/2028 3.740%
FFCB 3,000,000.00 2,956,992 6/22/2028 4.470%
FHLMC 1,000,000.00 853,500 7/27/2028 1.100%
FNMA 1,000,000.00 848,800 7/28/2028 1.000%
FHLB 3,000,000.00 2,981,700 9/8/2028 4.750%
FHLMC 1,000,000.00 842,300 10/19/2028 1.000%
City of Clovis
Government Maturities Exceeding One Year
As of November 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 3
25 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

Investment
Balance At Stated
Institution Face Value Amortized Cost Maturity Rate
San Diego Conv Ctr Expansion 1,450,000.00 1,435,929 4/15/2024 1.527% Sana Ana College Improv Dist 440,000.00 438,735 8/1/2024 0.644% UC General Revenue Bonds 1,000,000.00 985,983 5/15/2025 4.350% Antelope Valley Comm Coll 750,000.00 731,645 8/1/2025 1.767% Chabot Las Positas Comm Coll 1,490,000.00 1,436,902 8/1/2025 0.880% Foothill De Anza Ref Bds 2021B 835,000.00 786,781 8/1/2025 0.906% San Dieguito USD GO Bonds 1,000,000.00 952,381 8/1/2025 1.661% Santa Ana Coll Improv Dist 250,000.00 239,443 8/1/2025 0.744% Orange County Water Dist 900,000.00 863,081 8/15/2025 2.095% San Jose Ca Taxable Series B 2,355,000.00 2,271,085 9/1/2025 2.450% LA CUSD GO Bonds 1,000,000.00 1,005,950 7/1/2026 1.455% Chabot Las Positas Comm Coll 3,505,000.00 3,314,277 8/1/2026 1.080% Chaffey Joint Union HS 1,565,000.00 1,521,019 8/1/2026 2.475% Huntington Beach Union HS 3,305,000.00 3,152,187 8/1/2026 1.208% Placentia Yorba Linda USD 1,110,000.00 1,054,276 8/1/2026 1.070% San Diego Comm Coll Dist 470,000.00 459,823 8/1/2026 2.299% San Ramon Valley CUSD 2,125,000.00 2,125,000 8/1/2026 1.147% Sonoma County Jr Coll Dist 2,000,000.00 1,942,267 8/1/2026 2.447% San Diego Pub Facilities Dist 1, 625,000.00 1,551,549 10/15/2026 1.812% California St Univ Taxable 2021B 2,500,000.00 2,265,521 11/1/2026 1.142% El Dorado Irrigation Dist 1,175,000.00 1,110,889 3/1/2027 1.687% Rancho Santiago CC Ref 2020 335,000.00 295,971 3/1/2027 1.106% UC Taxable Gen Bds 2020 B 2,385,000.00 2,135,398 5/15/2027 1.316% El Monte HSD Taxable Ref 2021 600,000.00 538,675 6/1/2027 1.326% LA Dept Wtr Pwr Rev Bonds 2010C 2,000,000.00 2,103,176 7/1/2027 5.516% Colton CA USD Ref Bonds 2020 1,060,000.00 953,851 8/1/2027 1.603% Contra Costa Comm College Dist 880,000.00 827,390 8/1/2027 2.163% Foothill De Anza CC Taxable 2021 540,000.00 486,760 8/1/2027 1.473% Fremont USD Taxable Ref 2021 1,100,000.00 970,469 8/1/2027 1.113% Fremont USD Alameda County 1,140,000.00 1,098,295 8/1/2027 2.000% Marin County Comm Coll 2016 335,000.00 320,434 8/1/2027 3.330% Mount San Antonio CC 2021 285,000.00 250,557 8/1/2027 1.139% Mount San Antonio Comm Coll 405,000.00 373,717 8/1/2027 2.329% Saddleback Valley USD 3,000,000.00 2,903,148 8/1/2027 2.400% San Diego CCD Taxable 2019 590,000.00 551,873 8/1/2027 2.407% San Ramon Valley CUSD 1,435,000.00 1,313,764 8/1/2027 3.415% Santa Monica Comm College Dist 1,000,000.00 984,032 8/1/2027 3.050% Sierra CA CCD 2021A Ref 465,000.00 410,813 8/1/2027 1.129% William Hart USD 2020 Ref 200,000.00 176,351 8/1/2027 1.174% San Jose Ca Taxable Series B 910,000.00 848,277 9/1/2027 2.600% Soquel Creek Wtr Ref 2020 545,000.00 485,471 3/1/2028 1.445% Gardena Calif Pension Obligation 897,610.00 897,610 4/1/2028 2.663% California Health Facs Fing Au 760,000.00 712,500 6/1/2028 3.378% Beverly Hills Taxable Ref 2020B 635,000.00 559,497 6/1/2028 1.514% San Ramon Valley CA USD 1,820,000.00 1,596,487 8/1/2028 1.670% Santa Ana College Impt 1,500,000.00 1,290,372 8/1/2028 1.320% Corona Norco USD Ref Bond 2019 250,000.00 226,617 8/1/2028 1.670% Redondo Beach CA Uni Bond 2018 675,000.00 571,842 8/1/2028 1.320% City of Clovis
Municipal Maturities Exceeding One Year
As of November 30, 2023
ATTACHMENT 3
26 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Finance – Receive and File – Investment Report for the Month of December 2023.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Distribution of Investments

2. Monthly Investment Transactions

3. Certificates of Deposit

4. Municipal Securities

5. Graph of December 31, 2023 Treasury Rates

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Attached is the Investment Report for the month of December 2023. Shown in Attachment 1 is the distribution of investments which lists all the individual securities owned by the City with the book and market values. Book value is the actual price paid for the investment. Market value is the amount that the investment is worth if sold in the open market. The market value (which fluctuates daily) that is used in the report is as of the last working day of the month. Attachment 2 reflects the monthly investment transactions for the month of December 2023. Attachment 3 lists the certificates of deposit. Attachment 4 lists the municipal securities. Attachment 5 is a graph of Treasury rates on December 31, 2023.

The investment of the City’s funds is performed in accordance with the adopted Investment Policy. Funds are invested with the following objectives in mind:

1. Assets are invested in adherence with the safeguards and diversity of a prudent investor.

27 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

3. Sufficient liquidity is maintained to provide a source for anticipated financial obligations as they become due.

The Finance Department invests the City’s assets with an expectation of achieving a total rate of return at a level that exceeds the annualized rate of return on short -term government guaranteed or insured obligatio ns (90 -day Treasury bills) and to assure that the principal is preserved with minimal risk of depreciation or loss. In periods of rising interest rates, the City of Clovis portfolio return may be less than that of the annualized 90 -day Treasury bill. In periods of decreasing interest rates, the City of Clovis portfolio return may be greater than the annualized 90-day Treasury bill. The current 90 -day Treasury bill rate (annualized) is 5.16%. The rate of return for the City of Clovis portfolio is 3.33%. The goal for the City of Clovis investment return is 120% of the 90 -day Treasury bill rate. The current rate of return is 6 4% of the Treasury bill rate.

In accordance with the Investment Policy, the investment period on each investment does not exceed three years and can be extended to five years with the City Manager’s approval. As of December 2023, the average investment life of the City’s investment portfolio is 1.98 years.

Current Investment Environment and Philosophy
During the month of December 2023, the federal funds rate remained at 5.25% -5.50%. On December 31, 2023, the Treasury yield curve decreased from 3-month to 10-year notes.

Purchases and Maturities
• 2 government securities totaling $4,000,000 were purchased. • 0 government securities were called or matured.
• 4 certificates of deposit totaling $1,000,000 were purchased. • 1 certificate of deposit totaling $250,000 matured.
• 2 municipal security totaling $1,750,000 were purchased. • 0 municipal securities were called or matured.

Market Environment
• During December the federal funds rate remained at 5.25%-5.50%. • On December 31, the yield curve decreased from 3 -month to 10 -year notes. See Attachment 5, Graph of Treasury Rates on December 31, 2023.

Prepared by: Jeffrey Blanks, Deputy Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
28 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

STATED

DAYS TO

MATURITY

NET BOOK MARKET YIELD TO INTEREST INVEST MATURITY FROM
COST VALUE VALUE * MATURITY RATE DATE DATE 12/31/2023

GOV'T SECURITIES
FFCB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,959,450 0.250% 0.250% 03/01/21 03/01/24 61 FHLB 4,998,000 4,999,761 4,979,950 3.276% 3.250% 08/17/22 03/08/24 68 FHLB 1,994,000 1,999,246 1,993,840 3.835% 3.625% 09/14/22 03/08/24 68 FFCB 1,999,000 1,999,928 1,978,920 0.317% 0.300% 03/24/21 03/18/24 78 FHLB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,895,600 0.350% 0.350% 06/07/21 06/07/24 159 FHLB 941,770 982,482 978,790 4.500% 0.700% 11/17/22 06/24/24 176 FHLB 4,969,000 4,990,369 4,835,250 1.274% 1.050% 01/20/22 11/15/24 320 FHLB 1,595,506 1,669,303 1,662,234 4.515% 0.500% 11/16/22 12/30/24 365 FNMA 1,857,400 1,914,723 1,915,060 4.415% 0.500% 03/23/23 02/24/25 421 FNMA 930,300 958,279 957,650 4.338% 0.520% 03/23/23 02/25/25 422 FHLB 932,200 959,340 958,620 4.328% 0.625% 03/23/23 02/27/25 424 FHLB 3,980,000 3,992,245 3,884,120 1.922% 1.750% 02/28/22 02/28/25 425 FHLB 4,000,000 4,000,000 3,902,800 2.750% 2.750% 04/25/22 04/25/25 481 FAMCMTN 3,947,600 3,977,174 3,768,600 1.121% 0.750% 12/16/21 07/28/25 575 FHLB 5,000,000 5,000,000 4,927,750 3.600% 3.600% 08/30/22 08/28/25 606 FAMCMTN 4,948,500 4,977,701 4,690,150 0.869% 0.600% 10/14/21 09/08/25 617 FHLB 871,150 892,009 880,061 3.886% 0.500% 04/26/23 11/25/25 695 FHLB 4,963,000 4,982,312 4,621,900 0.750% 0.580% 09/08/21 02/11/26 773 FHLB 3,922,000 3,959,955 3,703,760 1.229% 0.750% 12/16/21 02/24/26 786 FHLB 2,751,000 2,806,092 2,775,420 3.916% 0.790% 05/17/23 03/16/26 806 FFCB 4,967,500 4,982,008 4,563,450 1.075% 0.940% 10/14/21 09/28/26 1,002 FHLB 3,649,200 3,771,160 3,663,480 3.342% 1.150% 06/29/22 10/28/26 1,032 FHLB 5,988,000 5,993,041 5,496,480 1.291% 1.250% 11/24/21 11/24/26 1,059 FHLB 5,127,757 5,076,969 4,726,100 1.580% 2.125% 01/20/22 12/11/26 1,076 FHLB 4,043,250 4,190,935 4,064,131 3.397% 1.020% 06/29/22 02/24/27 1,151 FHLB 4,550,000 4,686,471 4,544,674 3.173% 1.020% 08/17/22 02/24/27 1,151 FHLB 3,695,200 3,803,996 3,732,214 2.564% 0.900% 03/31/22 02/26/27 1,153 FHLB 6,072,400 6,240,345 6,122,589 3.737% 0.900% 01/19/23 02/26/27 1,153 FHLB 5,247,000 5,409,783 5,307,700 4.329% 0.900% 02/16/23 02/26/27 1,153 FHLB 5,050,770 5,212,338 5,161,065 3.971% 1.000% 12/14/22 02/26/27 1,153 FHLB 4,000,000 4,000,000 3,781,680 2.375% 2.375% 03/08/22 03/08/27 1,163 FFCB 5,160,000 5,292,287 5,248,380 3.996% 0.830% 03/23/23 02/22/28 1,514 FFCB 2,123,750 2,145,842 2,202,875 4.812% 1.000% 09/27/23 03/02/28 1,523 FHLB 1,893,209 1,909,429 1,976,880 5.018% 1.000% 10/18/23 03/10/28 1,531 FHLB 3,124,500 3,108,301 3,070,950 3.553% 4.500% 05/17/23 03/10/28 1,531 FFCB 6,102,000 6,088,091 5,963,760 3.501% 3.875% 04/26/23 04/25/28 1,577 FFCB 5,354,250 5,370,708 5,327,025 4.349% 3.740% 06/14/23 04/27/28 1,579 FFCB 2,955,000 2,959,283 2,944,440 4.814% 4.470% 07/12/23 06/22/28 1,635 FFCB 2,641,500 2,643,866 2,644,620 4.130% 1.230% 12/20/23 07/13/28 1,656 FHLMC 853,500 857,427 875,240 4.601% 1.100% 11/15/23 07/27/28 1,670 FNMA 848,800 852,851 871,040 4.613% 1.000% 11/15/23 07/28/28 1,671 FHLB 882,500 883,265 883,040 4.117% 1.300% 12/20/23 08/04/28 1,678 FHLB 2,981,700 2,982,458 3,105,420 4.892% 4.750% 10/18/23 09/08/28 1,713 FHLMC 842,300 846,330 865,330 4.614% 1.000% 11/15/23 10/19/28 1,754 SECURITIES TOTAL 152,754,511$ 154,368,102 $ 150,412,489 $ LAIF 56,142,817$ 56,142,817 $
Municipal Issuance 55,334,718$ 54,350,950 $
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 9,575,028$ 9,575,028 $ TOTAL CD'S 28,995,000$ 28,689,096 $
TOTAL INVESTMENTS 304,415,665$ 299,170,380 $
* Market values for securities obtained from US Bank.

City of Clovis
Distribution of Investments
As of December 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
29 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

Activity Maturity
Institution Description Activit y Amount Market Value Rate Date Date FFCB Gov. Sec. Purchase 3,000,000 2,641,500 1.230% 12/20/23 07/13/28 FHLB Gov. Sec. Purchase 1,000,000 882,500 1.300% 12/20/23 08/04/28 William Hart CA Mun Iss. Purchase 1,000,000 880,000 1.429% 12/21/23 08/01/28 Yosemite CA Cmnty Clg Mun Iss. Purchase 750,000 683,625 2.210% 12/21/23 08/01/28 American Bk Freedom CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 4.500% 12/22/23 12/22/26 Lafayette Fed Cr Un CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 4.950% 12/13/23 06/15/26 Mountain Comm Bk CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 4.500% 12/20/23 12/21/26 Rockland Fed Cr Un CD Purchase 250,000 250,000 4.600% 12/22/23 12/22/26 NYRK Cmnty Bk CD Maturity 250,000 250,000 0.350% 12/11/23 12/11/23

PORTFOLIO DATA
Current Month (12/23)
Book Market
CD'S 28,995,000 $ 28,689,096 $
Gov't Securities* 154,368,102 150,412,489
Municipal Securities 55,334,718 54,350,950
LAIF 56,142,817 56,142,817
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 9,575,028 9,575,028
TOTAL 304,415,665 $ 299,170,380 $
Prior Month (11/23)
Three Months Previous (09/23)
Book Market Book Market
CD'S 28,245,000 $ 27,693,005 $ CD'S 26,995,000 $ 26,265,805 $ Gov't Securities* 150,425,542 145,092,464 Gov't Securities* 143,006,374 135,435,648 Municipal Securities 53,528,065 51,964,707 Municipal Securities 55,366,986 53,208,549 LAIF 56,142,817 56,142,817 LAIF 55,589,725 55,589,725
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 22,985,608 22,985,608 Sweep Account (Union Bank) 12,584,965 12,584,965 TOTAL 311,327,032 $ 303,878,601 $ TOTAL 293,543,050 $ 283,084,692 $ Six Months Previous (06/23)
One Year Previous (12/22)
Book Market Book Market
CD'S 25,495,000 $ 24,736,894 $ CD'S 19,995,000 $ 19,489,847 $ Gov't Securities* 137,561,837 130,822,360 Gov't Securities* 125,365,607 118,704,819 Municipal Securities 56,361,225 54,477,583 Municipal Securities 52,935,000 48,186,516 LAIF 75,000,000 75,000,000 LAIF 74,905,243 74,905,243
Sweep Account (Union Bank) 28,879,606 28,879,606 Sweep Account (Union Bank) 21,537,434 21,537,434 TOTAL 323,297,668 $ 313,916,443 $ TOTAL 294,738,284 $ 282,823,859 $ *Adjusted Quarterly for Premium/Discount Amortization
As of December 31, 2023
Monthly Investment Transactions
City of Clovis
ATTACHMENT 2
30 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Negotiable CDs COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 12/31/23 FREQUENCY Transportation Alliance Bk 250,000 247,475.00 0.250% 03/12/21 03/12/24 72 QUARTERLY Preferred Bank 250,000 247,010.00 0.250% 03/25/21 03/25/24 85 QUARTERLY Bankunited Natl Assn 245,000 241,998.75 0.450% 03/31/21 04/01/24 92 QUARTERLY Greenstate Credit Union 250,000 244,650.00 0.450% 06/16/21 06/17/24 169 QUARTERLY Eaglemark Savings Bank 250,000 244,360.00 0.400% 06/30/21 06/28/24 180 QUARTERLY Texas Exchange Bk 250,000 244,045.00 0.500% 07/09/21 07/09/24 191 QUARTERLY BMW Bk North Amer 250,000 243,510.00 0.550% 07/30/21 07/30/24 212 QUARTERLY Toyota Finl Svgs 250,000 242,475.00 0.650% 09/09/21 09/09/24 253 QUARTERLY State Bk India 250,000 242,232.50 0. 650% 09/17/21 09/17/24 261 QUARTERLY Ubs Bank Usa 250,000 240,507.50 0.750% 11/17/21 11/18/24 323 QUARTERLY Webbank Salt Lake City 250,000 240,235.00 0.750% 11/29/21 11/29/24 334 QUARTERLY Medallion Bank Salt Lake City 250,000 239,892.50 0.900% 12/20/21 12/20/24 355 QUARTERLY Beal Bank 250,000 239,467.50 0.950% 01/19/22 01/15/25 381 QUARTERLY Mountian Amer Fed 250,000 245,290.00 3.450% 08/31/22 02/28/25 425 QUARTERLY Barclays Bk 250,000 240,277.50 1.700% 03/09/22 03/10/25 435 QUARTERLY Goldman Sachs Bk 250,000 240,135.00 1.650% 03/09/22 03/10/25 435 QUARTERLY Safra National Bk 250,000 240,900.00 2.000% 03/23/22 03/24/25 449 QUARTERLY Pentagon Federal Cr Un 250,000 240,750.00 2.000% 03/28/22 03/28/25 453 QUARTERLY Beal Bank 250,000 241,352.50 2.200% 04/06/22 04/02/25 458 QUARTERLY JP Morgan Chase 250,000 242,145.00 2.500% 04/08/22 04/08/25 464 QUARTERLY First Natl Bank 250,000 241,170.00 2.200% 04/12/22 04/11/25 467 QUARTERLY One Community Bank 250,000 242,525.00 2.700% 04/29/22 04/29/25 485 QUARTERLY Americu Credit Union 250,000 242,780.00 2.800% 05/02/22 05/02/25 488 QUARTERLY Synchrony Bank Retail 250,000 243,612.50 3.100% 05/20/22 05/20/25 506 QUARTERLY Connexus Credit Union 250,000 243,217.50 3.000% 05/26/22 05/27/25 513 QUARTERLY Bmo Harris Bank 250,000 243,535.00 3.150% 06/17/22 06/17/25 534 QUARTERLY Saco Biddeford 250,000 242,477.50 2.850% 06/17/22 06/17/25 534 QUARTERLY Baxter Credit Union 250,000 250,000.00 3.400% 06/28/22 06/30/25 547 QUARTERLY Capital One Bank 250,000 244,290.00 3.350% 06/29/22 06/30/25 547 QUARTERLY American First Cr Un 250,000 243,685.00 3.250% 07/15/22 07/15/25 562 QUARTERLY Trustone Financial Cr Un 250,000 243,645.00 3.250% 07/19/22 07/21/25 568 QUARTERLY American Natl Bank 250,000 243,027.50 3.100% 07/27/22 07/28/25 575 QUARTERLY TCM Bank 250,000 243,975.00 3.350% 07/28/22 07/28/25 575 QUARTERLY Generations Bank 250,000 244,155.00 3. 400% 08/03/22 08/04/25 582 QUARTERLY Direct Fed Credit 250,000 243,880.00 3.500% 08/17/22 08/18/25 596 QUARTERLY Resource One Credit 250,000 243,682.50 3.300% 08/17/22 08/18/25 596 QUARTERLY Connext Credit 250,000 244,422.50 3.500% 08/31/22 08/29/25 607 QUARTERLY Skyone Fed Credit 250,000 244,835.00 3.600% 08/30/22 09/02/25 611 QUARTERLY Credit Union of Texas 250,000 244,835.00 3.600% 09/14/22 09/15/25 624 QUARTERLY Forbright Bank 250,000 244,317.50 3.500% 09/16/22 09/16/25 625 QUARTERLY Ally Bank Sandy Utah 250,000 244,727.50 4.050% 09/29/22 09/19/25 628 QUARTERLY Alabama Credit Union 250,000 246,360.00 3.600% 09/20/22 09/22/25 631 QUARTERLY Kemba Finl Credit Union 250,000 246,550.00 4.000% 09/21/22 09/22/25 631 QUARTERLY Farmers Merchants 250,000 245,330.00 3.750% 09/28/22 09/29/25 638 QUARTERLY Jefferson Finl FCU 250,000 247,005.00 4.150% 09/29/22 09/29/25 638 QUARTERLY Dort Finl Credit Union 250,000 246,387.50 4.000% 09/30/22 09/30/25 639 QUARTERLY First National Bank 250,000 245,335.00 3.625% 09/30/22 09/30/25 639 QUARTERLY Numerica Credit Union 250,000 247,642.50 4.200% 09/30/22 09/30/25 639 QUARTERLY Vystar Credit Union 250,000 247,817.50 4.350% 09/30/22 09/30/25 639 QUARTERLY Bell Bank Fargo 250,000 246,977.50 4.150% 10/13/22 10/14/25 653 QUARTERLY Pacific Alliance 250,000 246,977.50 4.200% 10/14/22 10/14/25 653 QUARTERLY z1st Financial Bank 250,000 247,192.50 4.150% 10/13/22 10/17/25 656 QUARTERLY Great Southern Bank 250,000 248,490.00 4.500% 10/20/22 10/20/25 659 QUARTERLY American Bank 250,000 247,785.00 4.350% 10/21/22 10/21/25 660 QUARTERLY Queensborough Natl Bank 250,000 247,410.00 4.100% 10/21/22 10/21/25 660 QUARTERLY Public Alliance Cr Un 250,000 248,507.50 4.500% 10/25/22 10/27/25 666 QUARTERLY First Citizens Bank 250,000 249,307.50 4.700% 10/28/22 10/28/25 667 QUARTERLY LCA Bank Corp 250,000 248,012.50 4.400% 10/28/22 10/28/25 667 QUARTERLY Sharonview Fed Cr Un 250,000 250,002.50 4.850% 10/31/22 10/31/25 670 QUARTERLY United Heritage Cr Un 250,000 249,660.00 4.700% 11/04/22 11/04/25 674 QUARTERLY Capital One Natl Assn 250,000 250,432.50 4.900% 11/16/22 11/17/25 687 QUARTERLY Morgan Stanley Bank 250,000 250,145.00 5.000% 11/18/22 11/18/25 688 QUARTERLY Spokane Teachers Cr Un 250,000 250,880.00 5.000% 11/23/22 11/23/25 693 QUARTERLY City of Clovis
Certificates of Deposit
As of December 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 3
31 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Negotiable CDs COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 12/31/23 FREQUENCY City of Clovis
Certificates of Deposit
As of December 31, 2023
Morgan Stanley Private 250,000 249,712.50 4.750% 12/09/22 12/09/25 709 QUARTERLY Community Bank Topeka 250,000 247,710.00 4.300% 12/14/22 12/15/25 715 QUARTERLY Austin Telco Fed 250,000 250,765.00 4.950% 12/16/22 12/16/25 716 QUARTERLY Rogue Credit Union 250,000 250,020.00 5.100% 12/23/22 12/23/25 723 QUARTERLY Alliant Credit Union 250,000 251,570.00 5.100% 12/30/22 12/30/25 730 QUARTERLY First Technology Fed Cr Un 250,000 251,807.50 5.150% 06/30/23 12/30/25 730 MONTHLY Liberty First Cr Un 250,000 248,870.00 4.550% 01/17/23 01/19/26 750 QUARTERLY Capital Educators Fed Cr 250,000 248,870.00 4.550% 01/19/23 01/20/26 751 QUARTERLY Manufacturers Traders 250,000 247,877.50 4.250% 01/31/23 01/23/26 754 QUARTERLY City Natl Bank 250,000 247,350.00 4.350% 01/25/23 01/26/26 757 QUARTERLY Coastlife Cr Un 250,000 249,277.50 4.650% 02/13/23 02/13/26 775 QUARTERLY Achieve Finl Cr Un 250,000 249,267.50 4.650% 02/17/23 02/17/26 779 QUARTERLY California Cr Un Glendale 250,000 248,390.00 4.500% 02/23/23 02/23/26 785 QUARTERLY Truliant Fed Cr Un 250,000 249,012.50 4.600% 02/28/23 02/27/26 789 QUARTERLY Pioneer Fed Cr Un Mtn Home 250,000 249,000.00 4.600% 02/28/23 03/02/26 792 QUARTERLY Tradition Cap Bankk 250,000 248,712.50 4.600% 03/03/23 03/03/26 793 MONTHLY Alaska Fed Cr 250,000 249,672.50 4.650% 03/05/23 03/09/26 799 MONTHLY Mid Carolina Credit 250,000 250,977.50 4.600% 03/13/23 03/13/26 803 MONTHLY Blue Ridge Bank 250,000 250,962.50 4.500% 03/16/23 03/16/26 806 MONTHLY Northwest Bank 250,000 251,025.00 4.600% 03/17/23 03/17/26 807 MONTHLY Valleystar Credit Union 250,000 251,022.50 4.600% 03/20/23 03/20/26 810 MONTHLY First Community Bank 250,000 250,730.00 4.500% 03/22/23 03/23/26 813 MONTHLY Technology Credit Union 250,000 251,042.50 4.650% 03/23/23 03/23/26 813 MONTHLY Cibc Bank 250,000 250,697.50 4.650% 03/24/23 03/24/26 814 MONTHLY Signature Bank 250,000 251,020.00 4. 500% 03/24/23 03/24/26 814 MONTHLY Point West Credit Union 250,000 250,972.50 5.000% 04/12/23 04/13/26 834 MONTHLY Flagstar Bank 250,000 250,972.50 4.650% 03/30/23 04/24/26 845 MONTHLY Utah Cmnty Credit Union 250,000 248,827.50 4.600% 04/26/23 04/27/26 848 MONTHLY Cross River Bank 250,000 248,970.00 4.650% 05/19/23 05/19/26 870 MONTHLY Raiz FCU 250,000 249,837.50 4.650% 05/24/23 05/26/26 877 MONTHLY Usalliance FCU 250,000 249,267.50 4.700% 05/26/23 05/26/26 877 MONTHLY Chartway Fed Cr Un 250,000 250,380.00 4.900% 06/09/23 06/09/26 891 MONTHLY Lafayette Fed Cr Un 250,000 249,207.50 4.950% 12/13/23 06/15/26 897 QUARTERLY Customers Bank 250,000 250,690.00 4.700% 06/14/23 06/15/26 897 MONTHLY Latino Cmnty Cr Un 250,000 250,377.50 4.900% 06/27/23 06/29/26 911 MONTHLY Leaders Cr Un 250,000 250,967.50 5.000% 06/30/23 06/30/26 912 MONTHLY Farmers Insurance 250,000 250,910.00 5.000% 07/21/23 07/21/26 933 MONTHLY Maine Svgs FCU 250,000 250,910.00 5.000% 07/21/23 07/21/26 933 MONTHLY Popular Bank New York 250,000 249,965.00 4.850% 09/06/23 09/04/26 978 QUARTERLY Freedom Northwest Cr Un 250,000 253,085.00 5.350% 09/19/23 09/18/26 992 QUARTERLY Amex National Bank 250,000 250,887.50 5.000% 09/20/23 09/21/26 995 QUARTERLY First Gty Bank 250,000 251,442.50 5. 100% 10/13/23 10/13/26 1,017 MONTHLY Bridgewater Bank 250,000 251,420.00 5. 100% 11/03/23 11/03/26 1,038 MONTHLY Taylorsville Svgs Bk 250,000 251,420.00 5.100% 11/ 03/23 11/03/26 1,038 MONTHLY Mountain Comm Bk 250,000 247,217.50 4.500% 12/20/23 12/21/26 1,086 QUARTERLY American Bk Freedom 250,000 247,170.00 4.500% 12/22/23 12/22/26 1,087 QUARTERLY Rockland Fed Cr Un 250,000 247,905.00 4.600% 12/22/23 12/22/26 1,087 QUARTERLY People Bank Co 250,000 249,622.50 4. 650% 03/30/23 03/30/27 1,185 MONTHLY Carroll County 250,000 248,925.00 4.650% 03/30/23 03/30/28 1,551 MONTHLY Discover Bank 250,000 247,670.00 4.350% 04/26/23 04/24/28 1,576 MONTHLY TTCU Fed Cr Un 250,000 255,152.50 5.000% 07/26/23 07/26/28 1,669 MONTHLY Wells Fargo Natl Bk 250,000 257,185.00 5.050% 11/14/23 11/14/28 1,780 MONTHLY Consumers Fed Cr Un 250,000 256,665.00 5.000% 11/16/23 11/16/28 1,782 MONTHLY Negotiable CD TOTAL 28,995,000$ 28,689,096 $
CD TOTAL 28,995,000$ 28,689,096 $
ATTACHMENT 3
32 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

MARKET INTEREST INVEST MATURITY MATURITY FROM INTEREST
Municipal Securities COST PRICE RATE DATE DATE 12/31/23 FREQUENCY San Diego CA Convention Ref Bond 1,442,467 1,435,428 1.527% 08/18/22 04/15/24 106 QUARTERLY Santa Ana College Ref Bond 439,115 429,216 0.644% 12/17/21 08/01/24 214 QUARTERLY University CA Rev Bond 988,158 976,350 4.350% 09/15/22 05/15/25 501 QUARTERLY Antelope Valley CA Ref Bond 734,162 716,063 1.767% 05/12/22 08/01/25 579 QUARTERLY Chabot Las Positas Cmnty Clg Bond 1,444,182 1,399,512 0.880% 04/29/22 08/01/25 579 QUARTERLY Foothill De Anza Bond 793,392 788,232 0.906% 03/24/23 08/01/25 579 QUARTERLY San Dieguito High School Ref Bond 958,910 953,890 1.661% 10/13/22 08/01/25 579 QUARTERLY Santa Ana CCD Ref Bond 240,891 234,848 0.744% 05/12/22 08/01/25 579 QUARTERLY Orange County Water Dist Ref Bond 868,039 864,396 2.095% 10/13/22 08/15/25 593 QUARTERLY San Jose CA Txble Ser B 2,282,082 2,271,350 2.450% 10/13/22 09/01/25 610 QUARTERLY Los Angeles CA USD Ref Bond 1,005,405 917,010 1.455% 11/15/21 07/01/26 913 QUARTERLY Chabot Las Positas Cmnty Clg CA 3,331,213 3,202,448 1.080% 07/27/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY Chaffey CA High School Ref Bond 1,524,925 1,488,894 2.475% 06/30/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY Huntington Beach HS Dist Ref Bond 3,165,758 3,037,394 1.208% 04/29/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY Placentia Yorba USD Ref Bond 1,059,224 1,018,980 1.070% 05/31/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Cmnty Ref Bond 460,727 445,372 2.299% 04/29/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley CA USD Ref Bond 2,125,000 1,957,125 1.147% 11/03/21 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY Sonoma Cnty Jr College Ref Bond 1,947,394 1,900,000 2.447% 06/30/22 08/01/26 944 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Pub Facs Ref Bond 1,557,631 1,508,325 1.812% 08/18/22 10/15/26 1,019 QUARTERLY CA ST Univ Rev Ref Bond 2,284,645 2,280,550 1.142% 02/17/23 11/01/26 1,036 QUARTERLY El Dorado CA Irr Dist Ref Bond 1,115,615 1,078,403 1.687% 08/18/22 03/01/27 1,156 QUARTERLY University Gen Rev Bond 2,152,755 2,159,665 1.316% 10/13/22 05/15/27 1,231 QUARTERLY El Monte Ca Ref Bond 542,886 541,116 1.326% 03/24/23 06/01/27 1,248 QUARTERLY Los Angeles CA Dept Wtr Ref Bond 2,096,247 2,061,760 5.516% 04/27/23 07/01/27 1,278 QUARTERLY Colton CA Jt Uni Sch 960,821 964,759 1.603% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Contra Costa Ref Bond 830,844 818,479 2.163% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Corona Norco Ref Bond 227,841 230,880 2.297% 09/28/23 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Foothill De Anza CCD 490,256 490,012 1.473% 12/15/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Fremont CA Uni Sch Dist 1,101,034 1,053,132 1.113% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Fremont CA USD Ref Bond 978,974 984,159 2.000% 05/31/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Marin CA Cmnty Clg Dist 321,390 324,957 3.330% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Mount San Antonio Cmnty Clg 252,818 254,616 1.139% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Mount San Antonio Ref Bond 375,771 377,618 2.329% 10/13/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Saddleback VY Uni Ref Bond 2,909,508 2,808,870 2.400% 08/10/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY San Diego CA Com CD 554,376 552,547 2.407% 12/15/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley Ref Bond 1,321,726 1,302,837 3.415% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Santa Monica Cmnty Clg Ref Bond 985,080 967,980 3.050% 09/15/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Sierra CA Cmnty Clg Dist 414,371 416,561 1.129% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY William Hart CA Un High 177,904 179,524 1.174% 11/17/22 08/01/27 1,309 QUARTERLY Rancho Santiago Cmnty Clg 298,714 298,240 1.106% 11/17/22 09/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY San Jose CA Txble Ser B 852,242 857,129 2.600% 10/13/22 09/01/27 1,340 QUARTERLY Soquel Creek Cnty Ref Bond 488,864 485,268 1.445% 05/18/23 03/01/28 1,522 QUARTERLY Gardena Calif Pension Oblig 902,207 925,850 2.663% 10/19/23 04/01/28 1,553 QUARTERLY Beverly Hills Ref Bond 563,569 556,152 1.514% 06/15/23 06/01/28 1,614 QUARTERLY California Health FACS 713,789 728,840 3.378% 11/16/23 06/01/28 1,614 QUARTERLY Redondo Beach Ref Bond 577,213 591,003 1.430% 09/28/23 08/01/28 1,675 QUARTERLY San Ramon Valley CA Uni 1,608,354 1,630,338 1.670% 07/13/23 08/01/28 1,675 QUARTERLY Santa Ana College Impt 1,301,502 1,312,275 1.320% 07/13/23 08/01/28 1,675 QUARTERLY William Hart CA High 880,712 883,160 1.429% 12/21/23 08/01/28 1,675 QUARTERLY Yosemite Calif Cmnty Clg 684,019 689,438 2.210% 12/21/23 08/01/28 1,675 QUARTERLY Mun. Securities TOTAL 55,334,718$ 54,350,950 $
Municipal Securities TOTAL 55,334,718$ 54,350,950 $
City of Clovis
Municipal Securities
As of December 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 4
33 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

Treasury Rates as of December 31, 2023
3 month Treasury bill 5.40
6 month Treasury bill 5.26
2 Yr Treasury note 4.23
3 Yr Treasury note 4.01
5 Yr Treasury note 3.84
10 Yr Treasury note 3.88

CITY OF CLOVIS

FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DECEMBER 31, 2023 TREASURY RATES
As indicated in the above graph, treasuries decrease from 3-month to 10-year notes. 0 1
2 3
4 5
6 3 month
Treasury bill
6 month
Treasury bill
2 Yr Treasury
note
3 Yr Treasury
note
5 Yr Treasury
note
10 Yr
Treasury note

INTEREST RATES

TREASURIES
TREASURY RATES ON DECEMBER 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 5
34 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Finance – Receive and File – Treasurer’s Report for the Month of December 2023.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary of Cash Balances

2. Summary of Investment Activity

3. Investments with Original Maturities Exceeding One Year

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Attached for the Council’s information is the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended December 31, 2023.

Pursuant to Section 41004 of the Government Code of the State of California, the City Treasurer is required to submit a monthly report of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances.

Prepared by: Jeffrey Blanks, Deputy Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
35 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Previous Balance 95,247.55$
Deposits 32,703,109.60
Disbursements (27,696,187.28)
Current Balance 5,102,169.87$

FUNDS BALANCE
100 General Fund (481,996.09) $
201 Local Transportation 18,968,168.58
202 Parking and Business Improvements 187,372.03
203 Off Highway Use 73,481.96
204 Community Facilities District 2020-1 184,141.45 205 Senior Citizen Memorial Trust 56,298.16
207 Landscape Assessment District 5,469,880.46
208 Blackhorse III (95-1) Assessment District 3,414.38 209 Blackhorse III (95-1) Assessment District 2 19,172.39 275 HCD Block Grant Fund 600,874.69
301 Park & Recreation Acquisition 8,831,474.45
305 Refuse Equipment Reserve 2,446,381.09
310 Special Street Deposit Fund 49,829,000.40
313 Successor Agency 0.00
314 Housing Successor Agency 397,231.63
402 1976 Fire Bond Redemption 25,475.23
404 1976 Sewer Bond Redemption Fund 424,428.46
501 Community Sanitation Fund 16,159,826.51
502 Sewer Service Fund 37,722,723.50
504 Sewer Capital Projects-Users 551,580.09
506 Sewer Capital Projects-Developer 6,807,582.70
507 Water Service Fund 45,220,828.59
508 Water Capital Projects-Users 6,221,726.14
509 Water Capital Projects-Developer 12,142,684.51 515 Transit Fund 4,572,773.78
540 Planning & Development Services 15,617,733.62
601 Property & Liability Insurance (267,945.80)
602 Fleet Maintenance 23,984,253.75
603 Employee Benefit Fund 11,492,418.07
604 General Government Services 29,128,650.23
605 Facilities Maintenance 4,262,310.78
606 Information Technology 6,549,621.35
701 Curb & Gutter Fund 167,711.04
703 Payroll Tax & Withholding Fund 1,623,552.26
712 Temperance/Barstow Assmt Dist (98-1) 79,114.65 713 Shepherd/Temperance Assmt Dist (2000-1) 5,890.54 715 Supp Law Enforcement Serv 269,308.91
716 Asset Forfeiture 355,553.40
720 Measure A-Public Safety Facility Tax 1,967.42
736 SA Admin Trust Fund 1,421.40
741 SA Debt Service Trust Fund (189,388.39)
747 Housing Successor Trust Fund 1,137.98
SUBTOTALS 309,517,836.30$
999 Invested Funds (304,415,666.43)
TOTAL 5,102,169.87$
Statement of Cash Balances
As of December 31, 2023
City of Clovis
ATTACHMENT 1
36 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Balance of Investments Previous Month End 311,327,032.48 $ Time Certificates of Deposit Transactions
Investments 1,000,000.00
Withdrawals (250,000.00)
Total CD Changes 750,000.00
Other Changes
Government Securities 3,942,560.00
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00
Municipal Securities 1,806,654.00
Sweep Account (13,410,580.05)
Total Other Changes (7,661,366.05)
Balance of Investments Current Month End 304,415,666.43$ Insured CD's 28,995,000.00
Government Securities 154,368,102.35
US Treasury Notes 0.00
Local Agency Investment Fund 56,142,817.04
Municipal Securities 55,334,718.55
Sweep Account 9,575,028.49
Investment Total 304,415,666.43$
As of December 31, 2023
City of Clovis
Summary of Investment Activity
For the month of December 31, 2023
City of Clovis
Distribution of Investments
ATTACHMENT 2
37 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Investment
Balance At Stated
Institution Face Value Amort ized Cost Maturity Rate
FFCB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 3/1/2024 0.250%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,999,761 3/8/2024 3.250%
FFCB 2,000,000.00 1,999,246 3/8/2024 3.625%
FHLB 2,000,000.00 1,999,928 3/18/2024 0.300%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 6/7/2024 0.350%
FHLB 1,000,000.00 982,482 6/24/2024 0.700%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,990,369 11/15/2024 1.050%
FHLB 1,735,000.00 1,669,303 12/30/2024 0.500%
FNMA 2,000,000.00 1,914,723 2/24/2025 0.500%
FNMA 1,000,000.00 958,279 2/25/2025 0.520%
FHLB 1,000,000.00 959,340 2/27/2025 0.625%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,992,245 2/28/2025 1.750%
FAMCMTN 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 4/25/2025 2.750%
FAMCMTN 4,000,000.00 3,977,174 7/28/2025 0.750%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 8/28/2025 3.600%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,977,701 9/8/2025 0.600%
FHLB 980,000.00 892,009 11/25/2025 0.500%
FFCB 5,000,000.00 4,982,312 2/11/2026 0.580%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,959,955 2/24/2026 0.750%
FHLB 3,000,000.00 2,806,092 3/16/2026 0.790%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,982,008 9/28/2026 0.940%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,771,160 10/28/2026 1.150%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,993,041 11/24/2026 1.250%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 5,076,969 12/11/2026 2.125%
FHLB 4,500,000.00 4,190,935 2/24/2027 1.020%
FHLB 5,000,000.00 4,686,471 2/24/2027 1.020%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 3,803,996 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 6,800,000.00 6,240,345 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 5,700,000.00 5,409,783 2/26/2027 0.900%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,212,338 2/26/2027 1.000%
FHLB 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 3/8/2027 2.375%
FHLB 6,000,000.00 5,292,287 2/22/2028 0.830%
FFCB 2,500,000.00 2,145,842 3/2/2028 1.000%
FHLB 2,245,000.00 1,909,429 3/10/2028 1.000%
FHLB 3,000,000.00 3,108,301 3/10/2028 4.500%
FFCB 6,000,000.00 6,088,091 4/25/2028 3.875%
FFCB 5,500,000.00 5,370,708 4/27/2028 3.740%
FFCB 3,000,000.00 2,959,283 6/22/2028 4.470%
FFCB 3,000,000.00 2,643,866 7/13/2028 1.230%
FHLMC 1,000,000.00 857,427 7/27/2028 1.100%
FNMA 1,000,000.00 852,851 7/28/2028 1.000%
FHLB 1,000,000.00 883,265 8/4/2028 1.300%
FFCB 3,000,000.00 2,982,458 9/8/2028 4.750%
FHLMC 1,000,000.00 846,330 10/19/2028 1.000%
Government Maturities Exceeding One Year
As of December 31, 2023
City of Clovis
ATTACHMENT 3
38 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Investment
Balance At Stated
Institution Face Value Amort ized Cost Maturity Rate
San Diego Conv Ctr Expansion 1,450,000.00 1,442,467 4/15/2024 1.527% Sana Ana College Improv Dist 440,000.00 439,115 8/1/2024 0.644% UC General Revenue Bonds 1,000,000.00 988,158 5/15/2025 4.350% Antelope Valley Comm Coll 750,000.00 734,162 8/1/2025 1.767% Chabot Las Positas Comm Coll 1,490,000.00 1,444,182 8/1/2025 0.880% Foothill De Anza Ref Bds 2021B 835,000.00 793,392 8/1/2025 0.906% San Dieguito USD GO Bonds 1,000,000.00 958,910 8/1/2025 1.661% Santa Ana Coll Improv Dist 250,000.00 240,891 8/1/2025 0.744% Orange County Water Dist 900,000.00 868,040 8/15/2025 2.095% San Jose Ca Taxable Series B 2,355,000.00 2,282,083 9/1/2025 2.450% LA CUSD GO Bonds 1,000,000.00 1,005,405 7/1/2026 1.455% Chabot Las Positas Comm Coll 3,505,000.00 3,331,213 8/1/2026 1.080% Chaffey Joint Union HS 1,565,000.00 1,524,925 8/1/2026 2.475% Huntington Beach Union HS 3,305,000.00 3,165,758 8/1/2026 1.208% Placentia Yorba Linda USD 1,110,000.00 1,059,224 8/1/2026 1.070% San Diego Comm Coll Dist 470,000.00 460,727 8/1/2026 2.299% San Ramon Valley CUSD 2,125,000.00 2,125,000 8/1/2026 1.147% Sonoma County Jr Coll Dist 2,000,000.00 1,947,394 8/1/2026 2.447% San Diego Pub Facilities Dist 1,625,000.00 1,557,631 10/15/2026 1.812% California St Univ Taxable 2021B 2,500,000.00 2,284,645 11/1/2026 1.142% El Dorado Irrigation Dist 1,175,000.00 1,115,615 3/1/2027 1.687% UC Taxable Gen Bds 2020 B 2,385,000.00 2,152,755 5/15/2027 1.316% El Monte HSD Taxable Ref 2021 600,000.00 542,886 6/1/2027 1.326% LA Dept Wtr Pwr Rev Bonds 2010C 2,000,000.00 2,096,247 7/1/2027 5.516% Colton CA USD Ref Bonds 2020 1,060,000.00 960,821 8/1/2027 1.603% Contra Costa Comm College Dist 880,000.00 830,844 8/1/2027 2.163% Corona Norco USD Ref Bond 2019 250,000.00 227,841 8/1/2027 1.670% Foothill De Anza CC Taxable 2021 540,000.00 490,256 8/1/2027 1.473% Fremont USD Taxable Ref 2021 1,100,000.00 978,974 8/1/2027 1.113% Fremont USD Alameda County 1,140,000.00 1,101,034 8/1/2027 2.000% Marin County Comm Coll 2016 335,000.00 321,390 8/1/2027 3.330% Mount San Antonio CC 2021 285,000.00 252,818 8/1/2027 1.139% Mount San Antonio Comm Coll 405,000.00 375,771 8/1/2027 2.329% Saddleback Valley USD 3,000,000.00 2,909,508 8/1/2027 2.400% San Diego CCD Taxable 2019 590,000.00 554,376 8/1/2027 2.407% San Ramon Valley CUSD 1,435,000.00 1,321,726 8/1/2027 3.415% Santa Monica Comm College Dist 1,000,000.00 985,080 8/1/2027 3.050% Sierra CA CCD 2021A Ref 465,000.00 414,371 8/1/2027 1.129% William Hart USD 2020 Ref 200,000.00 177,904 8/1/2027 1.174% Rancho Santiago CC Ref 2020 335,000.00 298,714 9/1/2027 1.106% San Jose Ca Taxable Series B 910,000.00 852,242 9/1/2027 2.600% Soquel Creek Wtr Ref 2020 545,000.00 488,864 3/1/2028 1.445% Gardena Calif Pension Obligation 1,000,000.00 902,207 4/1/2028 2.663% California Health Facs Fing Au 760,000.00 713,789 6/1/2028 3.378% Beverly Hills Taxable Ref 2020B 635,000.00 563,569 6/1/2028 1.514% San Ramon Valley CA USD 1,820,000.00 1,608,354 8/1/2028 1.670% Santa Ana College Impt 1,500,000.00 1,301,502 8/1/2028 1.320% Redondo Beach CA Uni Bond 2018 675,000.00 577,213 8/1/2028 1.320% William Hart High 1,000,000.00 880,712 8/1/2028 1.429%
Yosemite Calif Cmnty College 750,000.00 684,019 8/1/2028 2.210% As of December 31, 2023
City of Clovis
Municipal Maturities Exceeding One Year
ATTACHMENT 3
39 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Finance – Approval – Res. 24 -___, A Resolution of the Clovis City Council Dissolution of the Community Facilities District 2004-1 Oversight Committee.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 24-___

RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending that City Council approve a resolution for the dissolution of the Community Facilities District 2004-1 Oversight Committee.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In March 2004, the City formed Community Facilities District 2004 -1 (CFD) to impose special taxes on new residential developments to raise revenue to supplement the costs of providing police and fire services in connection with new residential development. During formation of the CFD, a volunteer independent citizen’s oversight committee (Committee) was recommended to annually review the revenues and expenditures of the CFD. Although the CFD formation documents appro ved by the City Council do not expressly require the formation of the Committee, the Committee was established after the CFD was created. The Committee is not required by State law and is no longer necessary because other adequate safeguards and processes are in place to ensure transparency to the public and ensure that the special tax revenue collected from the CFD is spent appropriately by the City.

BACKGROUND
Fiscal year 2005-2006 was the first year the City received revenues from the levy of CFD special taxes. The Committee has been meeting once annually since the 2005 fiscal year and has consisted of five voluntary members each serving four (4) year terms without compensation. The Committee members are appointed by the Mayor, subject to approval by t he City Council. The 40 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

Committee includes one member of the real estate community, one member of the Building Industry Association, and three members who are owners of residential property within the CFD and who are subject to the special tax.

For almost twenty years the Committee has been meeting once every year to review the expenditures of the tax proceeds of the CFD. The meetings have been a mere formality for many years because the annual CFD Status Report detailing the tax special revenue and expenditures are also presented at a City Council meeting every December for the previous fiscal year. The Committee has met annually and there has never been a finding of an improper expenditure from the Committee reported to the Council since its inception. In an effort to respect the time commitment and effort of the volunteers, staff recommends the dissolution of the Committee.

There is no requirement in the CFD formation documents and the applicable law for CFDs and special taxes that requires such a Committee. The Committee is voluntary and can be dissolved with Council action to do so.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Committee is no longer functionally needed because other adequate safeguards and processes are in place to ensure transp arency to the public and ensure that the special tax revenue collected is expended appropriately by the City.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
Staff will inform the Committee members that the Committee has been dissolved and thank them for their service, and no further Committee meetings will be scheduled.

Prepared by: Gina Daniels, Assistant Finance Director

Reviewed by: City Manager AH

41 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 24-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS DISSOLVING THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2004-1 OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

WHEREAS, in March 2004, the City Council approved the formation of Community Facilities District 2004 -1 (CFD), and an o versight committee (Committee) was established to annually review the CFD tax revenue and expenditures; and
WHEREAS, the Committee has been meeting annually since the 2005 -2006 fiscal year to review the CFD special tax revenue and expenditures; and WHEREAS, the Committee is no longer ne cessary as other adequate safeguards and processes are in place to ensure public transparency and ensure that the CFD special tax revenue is appropriately expended; and
WHEREAS, the Committee is not required by State law, and the City Council is authorized in its sole discretion to dissolve the Committee.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Clovis as follows:

1. The Community Facilities District 2004-1 Oversight Committee is hereby dissolved effective immediately.

2. This dissolution shall not prevent a CFD oversight committee from being established in the future as approved by the City Council.

* * * * *

The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on April 15, 2024, the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Dated: April 15, 2024

________________________________ ________________________________ Mayor City Clerk
42 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim by Candace Smith.

ATTACHMENTS: None

RECOMMENDATION
Reject the General Liability Claim filed by Candace Smith.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City received a claim from Candace Smith (claimant) on March 12, 2024, alleging the Clovis Police Department intentionally documented false statements within a police report involving a vehicle accident. Ms. Smith is seeking compensation in an amount over $10,000 . It is recommended that the City reject the claim at this time, send notice of rejection, and refer the matter to the City’s third -party administrator for liability claims for further investigation and handling.

BACKGROUND
On March 12, 2024, a General Liability Claim was filed against the City of Clovis by Canda ce Smith. The claim was considered legally sufficient and timely. Ms. Smith alleges that on February 7, 2024, an officer from the Clovis Police Department purposefully manipulated the facts surrounding a vehicle accident she was involved in on the aforementi oned date. Ms. Smith further alleges that the false statement s made within the police report caused legal issues with the insurance company.

Ms. Smith seeks damages against the City in excess of $10,000. The claim has been filed as a “civil unlimited case”.

43 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

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

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the claim be rejected. The City’s liability is disputed, and althoug h the claim is legally sufficient, the amount of the alleged damages sustained by the claimant may also be disputed. Rejecting the claim and sending notice of rejection in accordance with the Government Claims Act will commence the time in which the claimant may file a lawsuit against the City based on the claim.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
A rejection notice letter will be sent to the claimant informing her that the claim has been rejected.

Prepared by: Charles W. Johnson, Management Analyst

Reviewed by: City Manager AH

44 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services - Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 15-03 Landmark Square

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This project included the construction of the Senior Activity Center building, Transit Center building, and all site improvements related to the Landmark Square project located at 735 & 785 Third Street in Clovis.

BACKGROUND
The bid opening was on November 13, 2020, and the project was awarded by City Council on December 14 , 202 0, to the lowest responsible bidder, which was determined to be AMG & Associates, Inc. The project was completed in accordance with the construction documents.

During grading operations at the project site, contaminated soil was discovered. City staff contracted with geotechnical consultant, Kraz an-VEIR, to evaluate and mitigate the contaminated soil condition. City staff and Krazan-VEIR worked with the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) to complete a comprehensive assessment of the condition and develop a plan to remediate an d/or mitigate the contaminated soil . The assessment concluded that the potential risks posed by the chemicals of concern at the site do not pose a substantial threat to on -site or off-site residents in accordance with the guidelines provided by DTSC. As an added measure of safety, a soil vapor barrier with a venting and monitoring system 45 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.
was installed at both the Senior Activity Center and Transit Center buildings. As a result of the soil contamination problem and other series of changes required to complet e the project, the contract time was extended.

The project was completed, and a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued by the Building Department on November 14, 2023. The Senior Activity Center was operational by November 20, 2023. Between November 2023 to March 2024, there were punch list items that were not yet completed by the contractor. All the punch list items have been resolved and the project is ready for final acceptance. The project is under a two-year warranty.

FISCAL IMPACT

1. Contract Award Amount $16,650,300.00

2. Contract Change Orders $ 2,882,743.16
i. Soil Contamination $1,899,345.29
ii. Errors & Omissions $ 391,658.56 iii. Other Project Changes $ 591,739.31

3. Liquidated Damages Assessed $0.00
Final Contract Cost $19,533,043.16
A summary of the project cost is in the table above. The contract change orders covered items that were not part of the original scope of work at the time of bid or were unforeseen site conditions and were needed to complete the project and meet the design intent.

This project was budgeted in the 2020-2021 Community Investment Program. The senior center and on-site portions of the project are supported by the General Fund. The transit portion is fully funded by a combination of a Public Transit Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement (PTMISEA) Grant, Prop 1B Transit Safety and Security Grants, and a Measure C Transit Oriented Development Grant (TOD). Sufficient funding has been establish ed for the project.

In December of 2019, in conjunction with the City Council’s approval of the final site plan review application for the project, an overall project budget was provided with a total cost estimate of $21.9 million. Annual debt service fro m the general fund was projected at approximately $541,000. Based on the bid results and with a 5% construction contingency, total project costs were projected at $19.7 million, with general fund debt service at approximately $475,000 ( 20- year bond).

The Smittcamp Family Foundation donation totaling $1,000,000 for the senior center, including $100,000 for each of the next 10 years will be applied directly against debt service for the senior center to pay for construction costs.

46 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.

On December 13, 2021, City Council approved a budget amendment for additional funding from the fund balance in the General Services fund and transfers from the Special Street Trust fund and Transit fund. The amendment increased the budget by $3.2 million.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Public Utilities Department, City Engineer, Engineering Inspector, Building Division, and Project Engineer agree that the work performed by the contractor is in accordance with the project plans and specifications and has been deemed acceptable. The c ontractor, AMG & Associates, Inc., has requested final acceptance.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

1. The Notice of Completion will be recorded; and

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

Prepared by: Jose Sandoval, Civil Engineer

Reviewed by: City Manager AH

47 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.

Attachment 1
48 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 23- 03, Willow Avenue Street Improvements to Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez in the amount of $1,058,995.50; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map

RECOMMENDATION

1. For the City Council to award a contract for CIP 23-03, Willow Avenue Street Improvements to Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez, in the amount of $1,058,995.50; and

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract to Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez, who was the lowest responsible bidder from a bid opening that took place on March 19, 2024.

This project involves ±0.5 miles of street improvements on Willow Avenue from Shaw Avenue to Barstow Avenue. Project improvements include removing and replacing existing A.C. pavement, replacement of curb returns, adjustments of utility boxes, manholes, and utility valve boxes to finished grade, replacements of traffic striping, markings and signage, traffic signal modification, and reinstallation of traffic loop detectors.

BACKGROUND
The following is a summary of the bids received on March 19, 2024:
49 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.

BIDDERS BASE BID

Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez $1,058,995.50
Dave Christian Construction $1,108,949.00
Cal Valley Construction $1,194,976.00
Doug Ross Central Valley Asphalt $1,268,040.00
Avison Construction $1,312,962.00
American Paving Company $1,505,959.20
Granite Construction Company $1,714,154.25

ENGINEER’S ESTIMATE $ 941,284.00

All bids were examined, and the bidder’s submittals were found to be in order. There were minor mathematical errors in two of the higher bidders that did not affect the order of the bi d results.

Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez is the lowest responsible bidder. Staff has validated the lowest bidder contractor’s license status, bid bond and completeness of grant funding paperwork.

Dave Christian Construction Company submitted a bid protest on March 22, 2024, filing a formal appeal to the award of this contract to the lowest bidder, Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez. Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez submitted a response to this bid protest on March 26, 2024, stating that they are in possession of the required license to self-perform the required concrete work of which was the subject of the appeal.

Upon review of all provided documents, Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez has the required licensure to complete the work provided within the project plans and specifications. Therefore, Staff recommends the approval and award of this contract to Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez.

FISCAL IMPACT
This project was budgeted in the 202 3-2024 Community Investment Program. The project is supported by Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) through the City Community Investment Program.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez is the lowest responsible bidder. There are sufficient funds available for the anticipated cost of this project.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

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

2. Construction will begin approximately two (2) weeks after contract execution and be completed in thirty (30) working days thereafter.

Prepared by: Jacob Redelfs, Project Engineer

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
50 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.

Attachment 1
51 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 23- 11, Alley Improvements to Dave Christian Construction in the amount of $636,931; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City, and Approval – Res. 24-___, amending the 2023-2024 Community Investment Program Budget for Sewer Capital Projects - Enterprise in the amount of $190,000.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Budget Amendment Res. 24-__

2. Vicinity Map

RECOMMENDATION

1. For the City Council to award a contract for CIP 23-11, Alley Improvements to Dave Christian Construction, in the amount of $636,931; and

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

3. For the City Council to approve a resolution amending the 2023-2024 Community Investment Program (CIP) Budget to include the Alley Improvements Project – sewer replacement, and authorize expenditures from the Sewer Capital Projects – Enterprise fund in the amount of $190,000.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract to Dave Christian Construction Co. Inc, who was the lowest responsible bidder from a bid opening that took place on April 2, 2024. Sta ff is proposing to approve a resolution amending the 2023-2024 authorize funding from the Sewer Capital Projects – Enterprise Fund for sewer infrastructure improvements that were found to be required during design.

52 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

The project involves improvements to three (3) alleys in the area between Jefferson Avenue and Brookside Drive. Project improvements include asphalt pavement, concrete valley gutter, drive approaches, adjusting existing utilities to finish grade, and sewer main replacement. The sewer main replacement was additional scope of work added to the project after determining that the existing sewer infrastructure was outdated.

BACKGROUND
The following is a summary of the bids received on April 2, 2024:

BIDDERS BASE BID

Dave Christian Construction $636,931.00
Asphalt Design by Juan Gomez $640,334.00
Cal Valley Construction $699,935.00
Tosted Asphalt $706,504.48
Avison Construction $721,359.00
Seal Rite Paving and Grading $739,159.00

ENGINEER’S ESTIMATE $761,195.00

All bids were examined, and the bidder’s submittals were found to be in order except for a few minor arithmetic errors on a bid which did not change the order of the bidders. Dave Christian Construction is the lowest responsible bidder. Staff has validated the lowest bidder contractor’s license status, bid bond and completeness of grant funding paperwork.

FISCAL IMPACT
A budget amendment will authorize $190,000 from the Sewer Capital Projects – Enterprise Fund. The project is supported by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Dave Christian Construction is the lowest responsible bidder. There are sufficient funds available for the anticipated cost of this project in the Streets Fund. The budget amendment is needed to financially account for the expenditures in the Sewer Capital Projects – Enterprise Fund for the sewer main replacement.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

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

2. Construction will begin approximately two (2) weeks after contract execution and be completed in thirty (30) working days thereafter.

3. Funds will be appropriated and accounted for in the City of Clovis 2023-2024 CIP Budget as specified in the attached budget amendment.

Prepared by: Jacob Redelfs, Project Engineer

Reviewed by: City Manager AH
53 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 24-__

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2023-2024 CIP BUDGET

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the FY2023-2024 City budget on June 19, 2023; and

WHEREAS, the City Council approved the expenditure of funds for the 2023 -2024 Community Investment Program – Sewer Capital Projects - Enterprise Fund; and

WHEREAS, the additional expenditures needed for the Alley Improvement project were not included in the 2023 -2024 Community Investment Program – Sewer Capital Projects - Enterprise Fund; and

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the funds for the costs can be allocated from the Sewer Capital Projects – Enterprise fund in the amount of $190,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the City of Clovis hereby approves the budget amendment as shown in the “Summary of Expenditures by Section” and the “Summary of Expenditures by Fund” as shown as Attachment A.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on April 15, 2024, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

54 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

Attachment A

SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY SECTION
SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT – ENTERPRISE $190,000
TOTAL SECTION $190,000

SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY FUND
SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT – ENTERPRISE $190,000
TOTAL FUND $190,000

55 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

Attachment 1
Attachment 2
56 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Planning and Development Services - Approval – Res. 24 -___, Annexation of Miscellaneous Properties to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. (Councilmember Bessinger has a conflict of interest on this item)

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Res. 24-___

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Bessinger owns property within 1,000 feet of subject property and should consider recusal.

Councilmembers should consider recusal if a campaign contribution exceeding $250 has been received from the project proponent (developer, applicant, agent, and/or participants) within the preceding 12 months (Government Code 84308).

RECOMMENDATION
For the City Council to approve Resolution 24 -___, approving annexation of miscellaneous properties into City of Clovis Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) No. 1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The developers / property owners of the properties listed in Attachment 1 of the proposed resolution have submitted executed landscape maintenance covenants, copies of which are on file with the City Clerk, indicating consent to annexation of the subject p roperty into the City of Clovis Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. This action will annex each of these properties into the Landscape Maintenance District so that they can be assessed for maintenance costs within their respective areas.

57 AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.

BACKGROUND
Council formed the original district on July 15, 1985, for the purpose of funding the maintenance of landscaped areas and parks. These properties are being brought to Council for annexation to the district as a group rather than separately in an effort to co nserve staff resources and Council’s time. Under the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, if all of the owners of property proposed for annexation provide written consent to annexation, then noticing, hearing, and filing of an Engineer’s Report is not required.

Under the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, and in accordance with Article XIII C and Article XIII D of Proposition 218, all the owners of property proposed for annexation have provided a written request and consent to annexation and have executed a covenant (petition) indicating acceptance of the annual assessment.

FISCAL IMPACT
This project will add any landscaped areas and will incrementally increase maintenance revenue through annual assessments from the annexed properties. Current year to date status of landscape maintenance district facilities is as follows:

Various LMD’s Year to Date
Under Consideration

LMD Landscaping added: 0.000 acres 0.564 acres

Resource needs added: 0.000 person 0.056 person

The resource needs estimate is based on 1 person per 10 acres of landscaped area.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The property owners for the miscellaneous properties have requested or consented to annexation into the City of Clovis LMD No. 1.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
The miscellaneous properties shall become a part of the City of Clovis LMD No. 1 and will be assessed next year for maintenance costs.

Prepared by: Jeff Brown, Engineer II

Reviewed by: City Manager JH

58 AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.

Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 24-__

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 OF

THE CITY OF CLOVIS

WHEREAS, City of Clovis Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 ("District") was formed by Resolution No. 85-78, adopted July 15, 1985, pursuant to Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972), herein the "Act"; and

WHEREAS, all of the owners of property proposed to be annexed to the District consisting of proposed developments as described in Attachment A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, have consented to said annexation and such annexation may be ordered without notice and hearing or filing of engineer's report, or both.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Clovis

1. That the public interest and convenience require that certain property described in Attachment A attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein be annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 of the City of Clovis for the maintenance and servicing of landscaping facilities.

2. The City Clerk shall receive and file the maps showing the boundaries of the areas annexed as set forth in Attachment A which boundaries shall be used for assessment proceedings until and unless a change of organization is approved pursuant to the Act.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on April 15, 2024, by the following vote, to wit.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

59 AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.

Attachment A
Miscellaneous properties to be added to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 of the City of Clovis:

Project Number Address Developer/Owner
SPR 2010-004A2 821 & 823 N Sunnyside Ave
Gurdwara Sahib Clovis, a California Religious
Corporation
SPR 1985-82A
1030 Gettysburg Ave., Suite
100 Mark Dessy and Bradford Dessy
SPR 2020-006 SWC Shaw & Leonard
Dyck Family Partners LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company
SPR 2020-006 SWC Shaw & Leonard
Loma Vista Marketplace, L.P., a California Limited
Partnership
SPR 2021-013 860 Holland Ave John Emmett and Lucretia Emmett SPR 2022-005 683 N Pollasky Ave
LB Wimmer Holdings, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company
Building Permit No. 23-
00712 2976 Villa Ave Kim Thanh Bui and Vincent Truong
CUP 2022-003 2193 Alamos Ave Marina Isounts & Tigran Sahakyan Building Permit No. 23-
03959 674 Oxford Ave Regina D. Bach & Agnes R. Swift
Building Permit No. 23-
04183 2413 San Gabriel Ave Robert Karl Domm
Building Permit No. 23-
04258 284 Ceaser Ave Chon Mora & Diana Lee Mora
SPR 2007-002A3
918/924/930/948 N.

Temperance Ave
A & M Clovis Investments, LLC, a California
Limited Liability
SPR 2022-014 288 W. Shaw Ave
Brown & Associates Clovis, LLC, a California
Limited Liability
SPR 1977-002A2 1542 Clovis Ave
Quintel Properties, LLC, a California Limited
Liability
Building Permit No. 22-
02750 305 De Witt Ave Vincent Martinez & Linda Joy Martinez Building Permit No. 21-
00194 2973 Larkin Ave Mark Simonian & Shirley Simonian
SPR 2020-003A 2355 Willow Ave Naksh Hospitality, Inc., a California Corporation Building Permit No.
832-2017 60 W. Holland Ave Justin M. Hoffman
Building Permit No.
963-2019 143 Armstrong Ave Robert Thompson & Darla Thompson Building Permit No.
5544-2018 174 Sylmar Ave Mark A. Cavalla & Linda S. Cavalla Building Permit No.
5672-2018 1050 Sierra Ave
Kathleen M. Compolongo and Carter V.

Compolongo
SPR 2018-011A2
SWC Leonard & Loma Vista
Parkway Wiloli, LP, a California Limited Partnership
Parcel Map 2018-04
NEC Peach Ave & Gettysburg
Ave Gleneagles Homes, a California Corporation
SPR 2021-014 520 Park Creek Drive
JVR Holdings, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company

60 AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services
DATE: April 15, 2024
SUBJECT: Consider items associated with approximately 1.62 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues. Harpreet Singh Sumal, owner/applicant; Kelsey George of Precision Civil Engineering, representative.
a. Consider Introduction - Res. 24 -___, A resolution to approve an environmental finding of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 2023-002 and Rezone 2023-002.
b. Consider Introduction - Res. 24-___, GPA2023-002, A re solution to amend the General Plan as part of the Second General Plan Amendment Cycle of 2024, re-designating the subject property from the Low Density Residential (2.1 -4.0 dwelling units per acre) and Open Space designations to the High Density Residential (15.1 -30.0 dwelling units per acre) designation.
c. Consider Introduction - Ord. 24 -___, R2023 -002, A n ordinance to rezone the subject property from the R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density ) Zone District to the R -3 (Multifamily High Density Residential) Zone District.

Staff: McKencie Perez, MPA, Senior Planner
Recommendation: Approve

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution, ISMND

2. Draft Resolution, GPA2023-002

3. Draft Ordinance, R2023-002

4. Conceptual Development Exhibits

5. Applicant’s Justification Letter

6. Correspondence from Agencies and Departments

7. Mitigated Negative Declaration

61 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council consider the introduction of the mitigated negative declaration, general plan amendment, and rezoning to allow a 26-unit multifamily development.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing a 26-unit multifamily development on approximately 1.62 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues (the “project”). The project requires the re -designation of the property’s General Plan land use designation from Low Density Residential (2.1-4.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac)) and Open Space to the High Density Residential (15.1-30.0 du/ac) classification. Coupled with the change in land use designation is a request to rezone the property from the existing R-A (Single -Family Residential Very Low Density) zone district to the R-3 (Multifamily High Density) zone district. Approval of these land use entitlements will allow the developer to proceed with the multifamily residential development review process where site-specific details of the development are reviewed by staff. The Project was considered by the Planning Commission at its January 25, 2024 meeting, at which time the Commission unanimously adopted resolutions recommending approval of the mitigated negative declaration and both the general plan amendment and the rezoning.

BACKGROUND
 General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (2.1-4.0 DU/Ac) and Open Space
 Specific Plan Designation: Loma Vista (Low Density Residential and Open Space
 Existing Zoning: R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density)  Lot Size: ±1.62 acres
 Current Land Use: Single-family residence
 Adjacent Land Uses:
o North: Single-family residence
o South: Single-family subdivision
o East: School
o West: Single-family residence
 Previous Entitlements: None

PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant requests approval of General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2023-002 and Rezone (R) 2023-002 to allow the development of a 26 -unit multifamily residential project on a ±1.62 -acre parcel that is located on the n orthwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues (see Figure 1).

The project site is currently developed with a single-family residence. The project is considered an infill development that is surrounded by existing residential development to the north, west, and south and a school to the east.
62 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

General Plan Amendment
General Plan Amendment Cycles
State law prohibits a local agency from amending its general plan more than four times during any calendar year ( with certain exceptions for affordable housing projects, court orders, etc. – Gov. Code § 65358). Multiple changes can be made during each of the four amendments, and the changes can be in conjunction with different, unrelated projects . For this reason, development projects requiring GPAs are frequently grouped into batches or cycles so that final action can occur on multiple projects with GPAs at the same City Council meeting and count as only one of the four amendments . The GPA currently under consideration (GPA 202 3-002), is part of GPA Cycle 2 of 2024. If the Council approves the introduction of this GPA resolution, final action to approve GPA202 3-002 will be scheduled for the May 13, 2024, meeting, or as soon thereafter as the other project which is part of Cycle 2 is ready to be considered.

General Plan Amendment Proposal
The applicant is requesting to amend the General Plan to modify the land use designation of the subject property from the current Low Density Residential (2.1-4.0 du/ac) designation to the High Density Residential (15.1 -30.0 du/ac) designation. Under the existing General Plan land use designation (Low Density Residential), the project site could support the development up to a maximum of six (6) residential units. With the proposed land use designation (High Density Residential), the site could accommodate development of up to 48 residential units. However, the applicant is only proposing 26 residential units with this project, which is 16.04 du/ac.

63 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

As illustrated in Figure 2, a narrow strip of land along the south and east boundaries of the subject property is also designated as Open Space for a planned trail. Though development of the trail will continue to be required in conjunction with the project, staff is recommending that the Open Space designation be eliminated and that a consistent land use designation be placed across the entire property.

The General Plan provides policies and actions to guide the orderly development of the City. A range of allowed density and intensity for each land use designation is provided within the Land Use Element of the General Plan. A general plan amendment is a change in City policy and therefore requires a compelling reason for such a change. According to the applicant, the site has several development constraints that include lot size limitations under the current zoning designation, limited access, and dedication obligations for the parcel. The constraints are further discussed in the justification letter provided by the applicant as part of the application (see Attachment 5).

Traffic and Utilities
The subject parcel is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues, two major streets. The streets are designed to move traffic and allow travel between neighborhoods.

Congestion is known to occur at the intersection duri ng peak periods, primarily associated with existing school-related traffic for the educational campus located on the east side of DeWolf.

Due to the size and configuration of the subject parcel, driveways serving the project would need to be located close r to the intersection than typically allowed by City standards. Neighbors FIGURE 2
General Plan Land Use Diagram

= Project Site (Proposed High Density Residential)
64 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
expressed concerns regarding the additional traffic that would occur with the proposed increase in density.

A Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis wa s completed for the project to determine the project’s impacts. The analysis used the rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) to determine the trip s generated by the proposed project. Based on the analysis, the proposed project would generate 11 peak hour trips in the morning and 13 peak hour trips in the afternoon/evening, which is substantially lower than the threshold of 100 peak hour trips that trigger further traffic analysis.

Based on the results, the City Engineer did not require additional traffic analysis. The project is also expected to generate 175 average daily trips (ADTs), which is less than the City’s daily trip threshold of 500 ADTs for screening out projects for further VMT analy sis. Based on these findings, the Project is expected to have a less than significant impact on traffic. The existing major streets can accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development.

A Water Infrastructure Investigation was completed for the project and determined that existing and planned water distribution systems were adequate to support the anticipated demands of the project. A Wastewater Service Study was also completed and indicated that the existing and planned wastewater collection system facilities can accommodate the proposed land use change.

Consistency with General Plan Goals and Policies
The proposed project would change the land use designations from Low Density Residential and Open Space to High Density Residential. The chang e in land use designation would not conflict with goals and policies of the General Plan land use element. The following goals and policies reflect Clovis’ desire to maintain tradition of responsible planning and well-managed growth to preserve the quality of life in existing neighborhoods and ensure the development of new neighborhoods with an equal quality of life.

Goal 3: Orderly and sustainable outward growth into three Urban Centers with neighborhoods that provide a balanced mix of land uses and development types to support a community lifestyle and small town character.

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 as signed designation, provided that the density across an individual project remains consistent with the General Plan.

Goal 5: A city with housing, employment, and lifestyle opportunities for all ages and incomes of residents.

Policy 5.2 Ownership and rental. Encourage a mixture of both ownership and rental options to meet varied preferences and income affordability needs.

65 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Goal 6: A city that grows and develops in a manner that implements its vision, sustains the integrity of its guiding principles, and requires few and infrequent amendments to the General Plan.

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:
 The proposed change is and will be fiscally neutral or positive.  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.
 The proposed change is consistent wi th the Urban Village Neighborhood Concept when within an Urban Center.

Policy 6.2 Smart growth. The city is committed to the following smart growth goals.  Create a range of housing opportunities and choices.
 Create walkable neighborhoods.
 Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place.  Mix land uses.
 Strengthen and direct development toward existing communities.  Take advantage of compact building design.

Findings for General Plan Amendments
The findings to consider when deciding on a general plan amendment application and staff’s response to each of those findings are listed below.

1. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan.

Although the request will modify the land use diagram of the General Plan, as described in the section above, the proposed amendment is consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the development of a mix of different housing types and sizes. Therefore, the amendment is internally consistent with the General Plan.

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

The project was determined not t o be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City. The project will serve the public interest by providing additional housing options. The project is expected to comply with all applicable municipal code standards. Furthermore, the technical studies conducted as required in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act indicated any potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant with mitigation.

66 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

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

The project site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the proposed project.

The project site is a ±1.62-acre infill site that is surrounded by existing residential development to the north, west, and south and a school to the east . The proposed 26- unit multifamily project would serve as an appropriate transitional use between the single- family residences and the school site. The potential of commercial and single -family development was not feasible due to access and circulation issues. The conceptual site plan has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding single family residential developments and to minimize any perceived intrusiveness . Sewer and water studies indicate adequate services for the proposed increase in density from this project.

4. There is a compelling reason for the amendment.

The parcel has several development limitations due to its size and location. The existing zoning designation requires parcels with lot widths that would not comply with the required development stand ards. The parcel also has limited access to Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues and requires multiple right -of-way dedications for a trail and neighborhood gateway. Due to these limitations, staff is supportive of a general plan amendment. The project is infill dev elopment and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. If approved, the project would develop an otherwise underused property, provide an alternative housing type in the area, and contribute to the City’s housing stock.

Rezone
The proposed change in land use designation also requires a change in the property’s assigned zone district. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from the current R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density) zone district to the R-3 (Multifamily High Density) zone district. The R -3 zone district is associated with high density residential uses, i ncluding attached and detached single -family residential, multi -family apartments , and condominiums.

With this project, the applicant is proposing the development of multifamily apartments. The proposed zone district is consistent with the High Density Residential land use designation with an allowable density range of 15.1 to 30.0 du/ac. The 26-unit multifamily project has a density of 16.04 du/ac.

Objective Standards for Multifamily Development
In accordance with the State of California Senate Bill (SB) 330, the City adopted a set of objective standards for multifamily development on December 16, 2019. Adoption o f objective standards provides a more efficacious process for residential development that contributes towards the state’s goal of addressing the housing shortage. Objective standards are development standards that can be objectively defined and measured w hen reviewing applications for new housing developments. Standards include quantifiable and measurable features of buildings and the property such as building height, required setbacks from property lines, building articulation, lighting, etc.

67 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

If approved, the project will be reviewed in compliance with the City’s Multifamily Residential Design Review process and subjected to the City’s adopted objective standards for multifamily residential development.

Findings for Rezones
The findings to consider when deciding on a rezone application and staff’s response to each of those findings are listed below.

1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan.

Although the request will modify the zoning diagram, as described in the above section, the proposed amendment is consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the development of a mix of different housing types and sizes. Therefore, the amendment is internally consistent with the General Plan. The proposed rezone to the R-3 zone district is also consistent with the proposed High Density Residential land use designation.

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

The project was determined not to be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City. The project will serve the public interest by providing additional housing options. The project is expected to comply with all applicable municipal code standards. Furthermore, the technical studies prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act indicated any potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project would be less than significant with mitigation.

3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the Development Code.

If approved, the proposed project would be subject to review under the City’s Multifamily Residential Design Review process. Site-specific details will be evaluated to ensure that applicable development requirements of the municipal code and objective multifamily standards are met.

4. The parcel is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities) for the requested zoning designations and anticipated land uses/projects. (§ 2, Ord. 14-13, eff. October 8, 2014).

See number 3 under the “Findings for General Plan Amendment” section.

68 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Planning Commission
The Planning Commission considered GPA2023-002 and R2023-002 at its regular meeting on January 25, 2024. Commissioners expressed support for the project and agreed that the project was designed to minimize impacts on the existing neighborhood.

There were several neighbors in attendance who had questions about the project and spoke against the project. Their concerns include the increase in traffic, intrusion of lighting and noise, density, architectural style, and the belief that the Project would result in a decrease in the values of the surrounding homes.

After considering the public testimony and deliberating on the merits of the Project, the Planning Commission unanimously approved GPA2023-002 and R2023-002 with a 5-0 vote.

Public Outreach and Comments
Neighborhood Meetings
Per City policy, the applicant is required to hold two neighborhood meetings. The first meeting must be held prior to the Planning Commission hearing and the second must be held after the Planning Commission hearing but prior to the City Council hearing.

The applicant held the first required neighborhood meeting for this project on September 13, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held at the Reagan Elementary School Multi-Purpose room located at the northwest corner of Ashlan and Leonard Avenues. In attendance were the project team, City staff, and several neighbors. Neighbors expressed concerns including:

 Expectations that the parcel will be single -family residential and do not want a change to multifamily residential.
 Noise nuisance from higher density housing.
 Higher density will bring too many people and higher water use.  Increase in traffic to the area would cause congestion.  Additional lighting from the development could be a nuisance.

The applicant held a second required neighborhood meeting on February 13, 2024, at 6:00 p.m.

The meeting was held at the Clovis Transit Training Room located at the new William H. “Harry” Armstrong Transit Center . Sixteen neighbors attended the meeting. Comments from the Planning Commission meeting were reiterated by the neighbors. The neighbors expressed concerns about traffic, density, architectural style, and parking. The applicant verified that the project would be submitted for review i n compliance with the requirements of the Clovis Municipal Code.

Public Comments
The City published a notice of this public hearing in The Business Journal on Friday, March 29, 2024. A public notice of this project was also mailed to property owners within 800 feet of the property boundaries. Staff sent letters to participants of the neighborhood meetings. At the time this staff report was finalized, no letters of opposition had been received in response to these notices.

69 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Review and Comments from Agencies
The Project was distributed to all City Divisions as well as outside agencies, including Cal Trans, Clovis Unified School District, Fresno Irrigation District, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, AT&T, PG&E, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, State Department of Fish and Wildlife, County of Fresno, and the Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

Comments received are attached ( Attachment 6) only if the agency has provided concerns, conditions, or mitigation measures. Routine responses and comment letters are placed in the administrative record and provided to the applicant for their records.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The City of Clovis has completed an initial study (see Attachment 7) assessing the project’s impact on natural and manmade environments, as required by the State of California. Staff is recommending approval of a mitigated negative declaration (“MND”). An MND is a written statement announcing that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment with the implementation of mitigation measures. The complete Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration can be found on the City’s website at: https://cityofclovis.com/planning-and- development/ceqa.

In summary, environmental impacts were determined to be found to be less than significant with implementation of mitigation meas ures for aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geological resources, and tribal cultural resources. (See the Mitigation and Monitoring Program that is attached to Attachment 1.) The Notice of Intent to adopt an MND was posted t o the City’s website at the web address listed above. (14 CCR § 15072, subd. (b)(2).) The proposed MND was made available for public comment and review at the City’s Planning and Development Services Department from December 29, 2023, to January 18, 2024. (15 CCR § 15073, subd. (a).)

Proposed Multifamily Development
The proposed GPA and Rezone are intended to allow the development of a 26-unit multifamily apartment complex. Based on the details evaluated as part of the environmental analysis, t he project would consist of three (3) buildings to accommodate the 26 units, two (2) carport structures for parking, associated landscaping, and utility and pedestrian infrastructure . In conformance with the Loma Vista Specific Plan, the project w ould also include a neighborhood gateway at the southeast corner of the parcel. The neighborhood gateway will be similar to the existing gateways on the south side of Ashlan Avenue.

The project layout and the conceptual design of the neighborhood gateway are shown on the preliminary site plan that was utilized as the basis for the project’s environmental review. Though the actions under consideration by the Council do not include approval of site plan an d architectural details, the preliminary materials provided by the applicant are attached to this staff report as Attachment 4 for informational purposes and to demonstrate that the site is physically suitable for the proposed project (see the findings section above). Conceptual building elevations are als o included in Attachment 4 . As described above, some neighborhood comments included concerns regarding architectural design. It should be noted that the attached elevations reflect revisions to the design that were developed by the applicant after hearin g the initial 70 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
comments from the neighborhood. Nevertheless, these elevations continue to be conceptual, and the final design will be subject to approval by staff in conformance with the City’s multi-family standards and the applicable design standards in the Loma Vista Specific Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The proposed infill development will provide additional housing, housing type, and a quality residential environment for this area as envisioned by the General Plan. The project does not substantially impact City sewer and water infrastructure and other pu blic services. As indicated in the above section, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Development Code. Staff therefore recommends that the Planning Commission approve resolutions recommending that the City Council approve GPA2023-002 and R2023-002.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
The final general plan amendment resolution and the second reading of the rezoning ordinance will be brought back to the City for consideration at the May 13, 2024 , meeting or as soon thereafter as possible. After final action on the GPA and Rezone, t he developer will proceed with the multifamily residential design review where site-specific details of the development are reviewed by staff.

Prepared by: McKencie Perez, MPA, Senior Planner

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
71 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 1

RESOLUTION 24-___

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS

APPROVING AN ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2023-002 AND REZONE 2023-002,

PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES

WHEREAS, the project proponent, Harpreet Singh Sumal, 3182 De Wolf Avenue, Clovis, CA 93619 , has submitted various applications including a General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2023-002 and Rezone (R) 2023 -002 (“Project”) for 1. 62 acres of property located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues, in the County of Fresno; and

WHEREAS, the City of Clovis (“City”) caused to be prepared an initial study (hereinafter incorporated by reference) in December 2023, for the Project to evaluate potential environmental impacts, and o n the basis of that study, it was determined that no significant environmental impacts would result from this Project with the adoption of mitigation measures; and

WHEREAS, on the basis of this initial study, a mitigated negative declaration has been prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code, section 21000, et seq., and Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, sections 15000, et seq.; and

WHEREAS, the notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration was posted to City’s website in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15072, subdivision (b)(2), and notice of the public hearing for this item was published with the The Business Journal on Friday, December 29, 2023; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has independently reviewed, evaluated, and considered the CEQA analysis outlined in the staff report, initial study, mitigated negative declaration and all comments, written and oral, received from persons who reviewed the mitigated negative declaration, or otherwise commented on the Project (“Administrative Record”).

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

1. The foregoing recitals as true and correct.

2. The initial study and mitigated negative declaration for the Project are adequate , reflect the City’s independent judgment and analysis, and have been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

3. The initial study and mitigated negative declaration were presented to the City Council and the City Council has independently reviewed, evaluated, and considered the initial study, mitigated negative declaration and all comments, written and oral, received from persons who reviewed the initial study and mitigated 72 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

negative declaration, or otherwise commented on the Project (“in the Administrative Record”) prior to approving the Project.

4. On the basis of the whole record, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with the adoption of the mitigation measures identified in Attachment A.

5. The mitigated negative declaration and the mitigation monitoring program set forth in Attachment A , including the mitigation measures identified therein and as described in the mitigated negative declaration itself are hereby adopted.

6. Directs that the record of these proceedings shall be contained in the Department of Planning and Development Services located at 1033 Fifth Street, Clo vis, California 93612, and the custodian of the record shall be the City Planner or other person designated by the Planning and Development Services Director.

7. The Planning and Development Services Director, or his/her designee, is authorized to file a notice of determination for the Project in accordance with CEQA and to pay any fees required for such filing.

8. The basis for the findings is detailed in the April 15 , 2024, staff report, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, the entire Administrative Record, as well as evidence and comments presented in connection with the mitigated negative declaration.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on April 15, 2024, and was adopted at a regular meeting of said Council held on ___________, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

73 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

ATTACHMENT A:

Mitigation Monitoring Program
GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
Aesthetics
AES-1 The Project shall comply with
Section 9.22.050, Exterior Light
and Glare, of the Clovis Municipal
Code, which requires light sources
to be shielded and that lighting
does not spillover to adjacent
properties.

City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

Air Quality
AIR-1 Consistent with SJVAPCD
Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10
Prohibitions), the following
controls are required to be
included as specifications for the
proposed project and
implemented at the construction
site:
 All disturbed areas, including
storage piles, which are not
being actively utilized for
construction purposes, shall
be effectively stabilized of
dust emissions using water or
chemical
stabilizer/suppressant or
covered with a tarp or other
suitable cover or vegetative
ground cover.
 All on-site unpaved roads and
off-site unpaved access
roads sh all be effectively
stabilized of dust emissions
using water or chemical
stabilizer/suppressant.
 All land clearing, grubbing,
scraping, excavation, land
leveling, grading, cut and fill,
and demolition activities shall
be effectively controlled of
City of Clovis
Planning
During
Construction

74 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
fugitive dust emissions
utilizing application of water
or by presoaking.
 When materials are
transported off site, all
material shall be covered, or
effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at
least six inches of freeboard
space from the top of the
container shall be
maintained.
 All operations shall limit or
expeditiously remove the
accumulation of mud or dirt
from adjacent public streets
at the end of each workday.
(The use of dry rotary
brushes is expressly
prohibited except where
preceded or accompanied by
sufficient wetting to limit the
visible dust emissions. Use
of blower devices is expressly
forbidden.)
 Following the addition of
materials to, or the removal of
materials from, the surface of
outdoor storage piles, said
piles shall be effectively
stabilized of fugitive dust
emissions utilizing sufficient
water or chemical
stabilizer/suppressant.

AIR-2 During construction of the
proposed project, the project
contractor shall ensure all off-road
diesel-powered construction
equipment of 50 horsepower or
more used for the project
construction at a minimum meets
the California Air Resources
Board Tier 4 Fina l emissions
standards or equivalent.

City of Clovis
Planning
During
Construction

75 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
Verification shall be provided to
the City of Clovis for confirmation.

Biological Resources
BIO-1 Conduct Preconstruction
Clearance Surveys for
Burrowing Owl. A
preconstruction clearance survey
is required for burrowing owl no
more than 30 calendar days prior
to initiation of project activities. All
survey results must be delivered
to the City of Clovis. If an active
burrowing owl burrow is found
within the p roject site, the
applicant must coordinate with
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) to obtain
applicable agency
approval/direction prior to any
ground direction prior to any
ground disturbance activities on
the site. Specific avoidance, den
excavation, passive relocation,
and compensatory mitigation
activities shall be performed as
required by CDFW. If no active
burrowing owl burrows are
identified, project activities may
proceed as planned following the
preconstruction survey.

City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

BIO-2 Nesting Bird Surveys and
Avoidance. If vegetation
trimming/removal, construction, or
grading activities are planned to
commence within the active
nesting bird season (February 15
through September 30), a
qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction nesting bird
survey no more than fiv e days
City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

76 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
prior to the start of such activities.

The nesting bird survey shall
include the project site and areas
immediately adjacent to the site
that could potentially be affected
by project -related activities such
as noise, vibration, increased
human activity, and dust, etc. For
any active nest(s) identified, the
qualified biologist shall establish
an appropriate buffer zone around
the active nest(s). The appropriate
buffer shall be determined by the
qualified biologist based on
species, location, and the n ature
of the proposed activities. Project
activities shall be avoided within
the buffer zone until the nest is
deemed no longer active by the
qualified biologist. Documentation
of all survey results shall be
provided to the City.

BIO-2a Compensatory Mitigation for
Swainson’s Hawk. If an occupied
Swainson’s hawk nest site is
found within the project
development limits during
implementation of Mitigation
Measure 2, the Applicant shall not
proceed with any construction -
related activities on the project site
until the CDFW has been
consulted regarding the need to
obtain an incidental take permit
under the California Endangered
Species Act. Impacts will be
minimized through permitting with
CDFW and will be fully mitigated in
accordance with CDFW
requirements.

City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

Cultural Resources
CULT-1

If prehistoric or historic-era cultural
or archaeological materials are
encountered during construction
City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and

77 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)

activities, all work in the immediate
vicinity of the find shall halt until a
qualified professional
archaeologist, meeting the
Secretary of the Interio r’s
Professional Qualification
Standards for prehistoric and
historic archaeologist, can
evaluate the significance of the
find and make recommendations.

Cultural resource materials may
include prehistoric resources such
as flaked and ground stone tools
and debris, shell, bone, ceramics,
and fire -affected rock as well as
historic resources such as glass,
metal, wood, brick, or structural
remnants.

If the qualified professional
archaeologist determines that the
discovery represents a potentially
significant cultural resource,
additional investigations may be
required to mitigate adverse
impacts from project
implementation. These additional
studies may include avoidance,
testing, and evaluation or data
recovery excavation.

If a potentially eligible resource is
encountered, then the qualified
professional archaeologist, the
Lead Agency, and the project
proponent shall arrange for either
1) total avoidance of the resource
or 2) test excavations to evaluate
eligibility and, if eligible, total data
recovery. The de termination shall
be formally documented in writing
and submitted to the Lead Agency
as verification that the provisions
for managing unanticipated
discoveries have been met.

During
Construction

78 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
CULT-2 If human remains are discovered
during construction or operational
activities, further excavation or
disturbance shall be prohibited
pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the
California Health and Safety
Code. The specific protocol,
guidelines, and channels of
communication outlined by the
Native American Heritage
Commission, in accordance with
Section 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of
the Public Resources Code
(Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982,
Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill
447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of
1987), shall be followed. Section
7050.5© shall guide the potential
Native American involvement, in
the event of discovery of human
remains, at the direction of the
County coroner. All reports,
correspondence, and
determinations regarding the
discovery of human remains on
the project site shall be submitted
to the Lead Agency.

City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

Geology and Soils
GEO-1 If prehistoric or historic-era cultural
materials are encountered during
construction activities, all work in
the immediate vicinity of the find
shall halt until a qualified
professional archaeologist and/or
paleontologist, meeting the
Secretary of the Int erior’s
Professional Qualification
Standards for prehistoric and
historic archaeologist, can
evaluate the significance of the
find and make recommendations.

Cultural resource materials may
include prehistoric resources such
City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

79 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
as flaked and ground stone tools
and debris, shell, bone, ceramics,
and fire -affected rock as well as
historic resources such as glass,
metal, wood, brick, or structural
remnants.

If the qualified professional
determines that the discovery
represents a potentially significant
cultural r esource, additional
investigations may be required to
mitigate adverse impacts from
project implementation. These
additional studies may include
avoidance, testing, and evaluation
or data recovery excavation.

If a potentially eligible resource is
encountered, then the qualified
professional archaeologist and/or
paleontologist, the Lead Agency,
and the project proponent shall
arrange for either 1) total
avoidance of the resource or 2)
test excavations to evaluate
eligibility and, if eligible, total data
recovery. The determination shall
be formally documented in writing
and submitted to the Lead Agency
as verification that the provisions
for managing unanticipated
discoveries have been met.

Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR-1 If cultural or archaeological
materials are encountered during
construction activities, all work in
the immediate vicinity of the find
shall halt until a qualified
professional archaeologist,
meeting the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for
prehistoric and historic
archaeologists, can evaluate the
significance of the find and make
City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

80 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
recommendations. Cultural
resource materials may include
prehistoric resources such as
flaked and ground stone tools and
debris, shell, bone, ceramics, and
fire-affected rock as well as
historic resources such as glass,
metal, wood, brick, or structural
remnants.

If a potentially eligible re source is
encountered, then the qualified
professional archaeologist, the
Lead Agency, and the project
proponent shall arrange for either
1) total avoidance of the resource
or 2) test excavations to evaluate
eligibility and, if eligible, total data
recovery. The determination shall
be formally documented in writing
and submitted to the Lead Agency
as verification that the provisions
for managing unanticipated
discoveries have been met.

TCR-2 If human remains are discovered
during construction or operational
activities, further excavation or
disturbance shall be prohibited
pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the
California Health and Safety
Code. The specific protocol,
guidelines, and channels of
communication outlined by the
Native American Heritage
City of Clovis
Planning
Prior to
Permits and
During
Construction

81 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Proposed
Mitigation Summary of Measure Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Verification
(Date and
Initials)
Commission, in accordance with
Section 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of
the Public Resources Code
(Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982,
Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill
447 (Chapter 44 , Statutes of
1987), shall be followed. Section
7050.5© shall guide the potential
Native American involvement, in
the event of discovery of human
remains, at the direction of the
County coroner. All reports,
correspondence, and
determinations regarding the
discovery of human remains on
the project site shall be submitted
to the Lead Agency.

82 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 2
RESOLUTION 24-___

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2023-002 AS PART OF THE SECOND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE OF 2024, AMENDING THE 2014 CLOVIS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT FOR APPROXIMATELY 1.62 ACRES LOCATED

NORTHWEST CORNER OF ASHLAN AND DE WOLF AVENUES

WHEREAS, the project proponent, Harpreet Singh Sumal, 3182 De Wolf Avenue, Clovis, CA 93619, has submitted a General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2023-002 for 1.62 acres of property located northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues (“Property”), in the County of Fresno; and

WHEREAS, GPA2023-002 proposes to amend the 2014 Clovis General Plan Land Use Element for the Property from the Low Density Residential and Open Space designations to the High Density Residential designation; and

WHEREAS, GPA 2023-002 is part of the Second General Plan Amendment Cycle of 2024; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered GPA202 3-002 at a duly noticed public hearing on January 2 5, 202 4, at which time the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the Project; and

WHEREAS, the City published notice of the public hearing in The Business Journal on March 2 9, 202 4, mailed public notices to property owners within 800 feet of the Property seventeen (17) days prior to the City Council hearing, and otherwise posted notice of the public hearing according to applicable law; and

WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on April 15, 2024; and

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

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

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

a. The GPA2023-002 is internally consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan.
83 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

b. The GPA2023-002 would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City.

c. The Property is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities) for the development of the Project.

d. There is a compelling reason for the amendment, namely, the site has several development limitations, including lot size limitations under the current zoning designation, limited access and dedication obligations for the parcel.

2. The City Council finds on the basis of th e initial study completed for the Project , a mitigated negative declaration has been prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code, section 21000, et seq., and Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, sections 15000, et seq.

3. The basis for the findings is detailed in the April 15, 2024 staff report, which is hereby incorporated by reference, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing.

4. GPA2023-002 is hereby approved as part of the Second General Plan Amendment Cycle of 2024.

* * * * *

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

84 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 3
ORDINANCE 24-___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS AMENDING AND

CHANGING THE OFFICIAL ZONE MAP OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 9.080.020 OF THE CLOVIS MUNICIPAL CODE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY

1.62 ACRES FROM THE R-A (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW DENSITY) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE R-3 (MULTIFAMILY HIGH DENSITY) ZONE DISTRICT FOR

PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ASHLAN AND DE WOLF

AVENUES

WHEREAS, Harpreet Singh Sumal, 3182 De Wolf Avenue, Clovis, CA 93619 , submitted an application for Rezone (R) 2023-002 in connection with the proposed development of a 26- unit multifamily apartment complex (“Project”) on approximately 1.62 acres of property located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues (“Property”); and

WHEREAS, R2023-002 proposes to rezone the property from the R-A (Single -Family Residential Very Low Density) Zone District to the R-3 (Multifamily High Density) Zone District; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on January 25, 2024, to consider the Project approval, at which time interested persons were given opportunity to comment on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted and recommended that the City Council approve R2023-002; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission’s recommendation s were forwarded to the City Council for consideration; and

WHEREAS, the City published notice of the public hearing in The Business Journal on March 2 9, 202 4, mailed public notices to property owners w ithin 800 feet of the Property seventeen (17) days prior to the City Council hearing, and otherwise posted notice of the public hearing according to applicable law; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 15 , 2024 , to consider approval of R2023-002; and

WHEREAS, on the basis of an initial study completed for the project, a proposed mitigated negative declaration has been prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code, section 21000, et seq., and Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, sections 15000, et seq.; and

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

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

1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the adopted General Plan.

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

3. The Property is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities) for the requested zoning designation and development of the Project.

4. The City Council finds on the basis of th e initial study completed for the Project , a mitigated negative declaration has been prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code, section 21000, et seq., and Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, sections 15000, et seq.

5. The basis and evidence for the findings are detailed in the April 15, 2024, staff report, which is hereby incorporated by reference, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing.

The City Council of the City of Clovis does ordain as follows:

Section 1 The official map of the city is amended in accordance with Section 9.08.020 and Chapter 9.86 of the Clovis Municipal Code by rezoning certain land in the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, State of California, to wit:

LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

See the attached Attachment A.

From the R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density) Zone District to the R-3 (Multifamily High Density) Zone District.

Section 2 This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

86 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

APPROVED: April 15, 2024

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

* * * * * * * * * *

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the City Council held on April 15 , 2024 , and was adopted at a regular meeting of said Council held on ________________, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

_______________________________
City Clerk

87 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

ATTACHMENT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

THE LAND REFERRED TO IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF FRESNO, CITY OF CLOVIS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

THE EAST 345 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUA RTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, R ANGE 21

EAST, MOUNT DIABLO B ASE AND MERIDIAN, AC CORDING TO THE OFFIC IAL PLAT THEREOF.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 350 FEET;

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EAST 30 FEET;

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 30 FEET;

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 21 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON A LINE WH ICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND 30 FEET NORTHERLY FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID S ECTION 14; THENCE WE STERLY ALONG SAID LI NE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND 30 FEET NORTHERLY FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FE ET TO A POINT ON A L INE WHICH IS PARALLE L WITH AND 30 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14 SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WESTERLY, CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET; THENCE N ORTHEASTERLY A DISTA NCE OF 28.28 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON A LINE W HICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND 30 .00 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14 SAID POINT BEING 20.00 FEET NORTHERLY FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BE GINNING; THENCE SOUT HERLY, ALONG A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND 30.00 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND AS GRANTED TO

THE CITY OF CLOVIS, A CALIFORNIA MUNICIP AL CORPORATION, BY G RANT DEED RECORDED JANUARY 25, 2007 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2007-0015488, OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND AS GRANTED TO

THE CITY OF CLOVIS, A CALIFORN IA MUNICIPAL CORPORA TION, BY GRANT DEED RECORDED MAY 13, 2015 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2015-0059196, OFFICIAL RECORDS.

APN: 555-042-70

MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 3182 DE WOLF AVENUE, CLOVIS, CA 93619

88 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
5'-0"267'-1"
15'-0"238'-8"30'-0"
15'-0"
15'-0"
OFC0.1
ARC+ITECTURALPROPOSED SITE

1. EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE PATHS OF TRAVEL SHALL BE CONTINUOUSLYACCESSIBLE BARRIER FREE ROUTES WITH THE FOLLOWINGREQUIREMENTS: - THERE SHALL BE NO ABRUPT CHANGES IN LEVEL EXCEEDING 1/2" LEVELED AT 1:2 MAX. SLOPE - BE A MINIMUM OF 48" IN WIDTH - SURFACE IS SLIP RESISTANT, STABLE, FIRM AND SMOOTH - HAVE A MAX. OF 2% CROSS SLOPE (1/4"/FT.) - SHALL HAVE ACCESSIBLE RAMPWHERE NECESSARY TO CHANGE ELEVATION AT A SLOPE EXCEEDING 5% (ie;1:20) - HAVE DETECTABLE WARNINGS WHERE THE PATH OF TRAVEL CROSSES/ADJOINS A VEHICULAR ROUTE2. REFER TO SHEET A0.0.1 FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.3. REFER TO SHEETS A8.01, A8.02 AND A8.04 FOR TYPICAL DETAILSPERTAINING TO ACCESSIBLE ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT.4. ALL RESIDENTIAL UNIT ON ACCESSIBLE LEVELS SHALL BE CONSIDEREDADAPTABLE UNITS FOR FUTURE INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE FEATURES.

SITE ACCESSIBILITY NOTES:

SITE GENERAL NOTES:

VICINITY MAP
6ITE PLAN
NORTHEWPROJECT INFORMATION6307 DEWOLF AVE,A.P.N.555 - 042 - 70CLOVIS. CA 93645 ASHLAN AVE.DEWOLF AVE.

SCALE: 1/16" = 1' - 0"SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

CONSULTANTS
DATE:05.30.2022
TITLE SHEET:

NO.DATE:

STUDIOCreative Homes l Custom Livingwww.rhousdesign.comRHOUSDESIGN RHOUSDESIGN EXPRESSLY RESERVES ITS COMMONLAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER APPLICABLE PROPERTYRIGHTS IN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TOBE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BEASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRSTOBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENTOF RHOUSDESIGN. IN THE EVENT OF UNAUTHORIZEDREUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THETHIRD PARTY SHALL HOLD RHOUSDESIGN HARMLESS,AND SHALL BEAR THE COST OF THE LEGAL FEES,ASSOCIATED WITH DEFENDING AND ENFORCINGTHESE RIGHTS.

SCALE:DRAWN:SITE PLAN REVIEW
PROJECT:DeWolf Ave.Clovis., CA. 93645APN #555-042-70MULTI FAMILY6307APARTMENTCOMPLEX

1. ANY SURVEY MONUMENTS WITHIN THE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PRESERVED ORRESET BY A PERSON LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAND SURVEYING IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.2. TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING EXCAVATION OPERATIONS WITHIN THE STREETRIGHT-OF-WAY AND /OR UTILITY EASEMENTS, ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES SHALLHAVE BEEN LOCATED BY UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT (USA). CALL 1-800-642-2444.3. UNDERGROUND ALL EXISTING OFFSITE OVERHEAD UTILITIES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THISSITE/MAP AS PER FMC SECTION 15-4114.4. REPAIR ALL DAMAGED AND/OR OFF-GRADE CONCRETE STREET AND/OR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTSAS DETERMINED BY THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ENGINEER PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. ALLEXISTING SIDEWALKS IN EXCESS OF 2% MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE MUST BE BROUGHT INTOCOMPLIANCE PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY PUBLIC WORKS.5. DEED(S) OF EASEMENT(S) FOR THE REQUIRED DEDICATION(S) SHALL BE PREPARED BY THEOWNER/DEVELOPER'S ENGINEER AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY WITH VERIFICATION OFOWNERSHIP PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS.6. SUBMIT STREET LIGHTING PLANS TO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, TRAFFIC AND ENGINEERINGSERVICES.7. AISLES, PASSAGEWAYS, RECESSES, PARKING AREAS, CARPORTS, GARAGES, ETC., RELATED TOAND WITHIN THE BUILDING COMPLEX SHALL BE ILLUMINATED WITH AN INTENSITY OF AT LEAST0.25 FOOT-CANDLES AT THE GROUND LEVEL DURING THE HOURS OF DARKNESS. LIGHTINGDEVICES SHALL BE PROTECTED BY WEATHER AND VANDAL-RESISTANT COVERS.8. EXTERIOR LIGHTING WITH AN INTENSITY OF AT LEAST 0.25 FOOT-CANDLES AT THE GROUNDLEVEL SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR A SECURE NIGHTTIME PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT BYREINFORCING ENTRANCES, PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND OPEN AREAS WITH A SAFE LEVEL OFILLUMINATION.9. ALL EXTERIOR DOORS, DURING THE HOURS OF DARKNESS, SHALL BE ILLUMINATED WITH AMINIMUM OF 0.5 FOOT-CANDLE OF LIGHT.10. ALL LIGHTING FIXTURES SHALL BE SHIELDED SO AS NOT TO PRODUCE OBTRUSIVE GLARE ONTOTHE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ADJOINING PROPERTIES. ALL LUMINARIES SHALL MEET THEMOST RECENTLY ADOPTED CRITERIA OF THE ILLUMINATING ENGINEERING SOCIETY OF NORTHAMERICA (IESNA) FOR "CUT OFF" OR "FULL CUT OFF" LUMINARIES. SHALL BE OPERATED SUCHTHAT SIGNIFICANT, DIRECT GLARE, INCIDENTAL TO THE OPERATION OF THE USE IS VISIBLEBEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE USE IS LOCATED.11. LIGHTS SHALL BE PLACED TO DEFLECT LIGHT AWAY FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND PUBLICSTREETS, AND TO PREVENT ADVERSE INTERFERENCE WITH THE NORMAL OPERATION ORENJOYMENT OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. A. DIRECT OR SKY-REFLECTED GLARE FROM FLOODLIGHTS SHALL NOT BE DIRECTED INTO ANYOTHER PROPERTY OR STREET. B. NO LIGHT OR COMBINATION OF LIGHTS, OR ACTIVITY SHALL CAST LIGHT EXCEEDING ONEFOOT CANDLE ONTO A PUBLIC STREET, WITH THE ILLUMINATION LEVEL MEASURED AT THECENTERLINE OF THE STREET. C. NO LIGHT, COMBINATION OF LIGHTS, OR ACTIVITY SHALL CAST LIGHT EXCEEDING 0.5 FOOTCANDLE ONTO A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, OR ANY PROPERTY CONTAININGRESIDENTIAL USES.12. EACH SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURE SERVING A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SHALL BEDESIGNED TO ALLOW WALK-IN ACCESS WITHOUT HAVING TO OPEN THE MAIN ENCLOSURE GATE.13. ENCLOSURE PADS MUST BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT CONTAMINATION OF THE STORMWATERSYSTEM. MEASURES THAT MAY BE TAKEN TO ACHIEVE THIS INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO,USING ROOFS TO DIVERT STORMWATER AWAY FROM THE ENCLOSURES, CREATING GRADEBREAKS TO PROPERLY DIRECT STORMWATER AWAY WHILE KEEPING ANY WATER THAT MAY BEIN THE ENCLOSURE FROM SPILLING OUT, AND CONNECTING A DRAIN IN THE ENCLOSURE TO THESEWER SYSTEM TO COLLECT CONTAMINATED WATER IN CASES OF SPILLAGE, WASHING, ETC.14. PROVIDE SIGN(S) (17" x 22" MIN.) AT ALL PUBLIC DRIVES TO THE PROPERTY STATING,"WARNING-VEHICLES STOPPED, PARKED, OR LEFT STANDING IN FIRE LANES WILL BEIMMEDIATELY REMOVED AT OWNER'S EXPENSE PER 22658 OF THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLECODE-FRESNO POLICE DEPARTMENT.15. FIRE LANE CURBS SHALL BE PAINTED RED ON THE EXTERIOR TWO FACES AND LABELED WITHWHITE PAINT WITH 3" HIGH LETTERS, "FIRE LANE" AT 50'-0" O.C.16. SUBMIT ENGINEERED STREET CONSTRUCTION PLANS TO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,TRAFFIC, AND ENGINEERING SERVICES.17. IF NOT EXISTING TO PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS, INSTALL STREET LIGHTS ON ALL FRONTAGETO CITY STANDARDS AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER. STREET LIGHTINGPLANS ARE REQUIRED AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PUBLIC WORKSDEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORK.18. ON-SITE LIGHTING NOT TO BE WITHIN 3'-0" OF VEHICULAR OVERHANGS.

BUILDING INFORMATION:ADDRESS NUMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED ON EVERY BUILDING AS PERADOPTED CLOVIS FIRE DEPARTMENT STANDARD # 1.8. LARGE COMMERCIAL,INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL BUILDING ADDRESSINGON THE BACK SIDE OF THE BUILDING AS APPROVED BY CITY OF CLOVIS FIREDEPARTMENT.BUILDING NUMBERS SHALL:1. BE A MINIMUM OF TWELVE INCHES (12") TALL.2. BE A MINIMUM OF ONE AND ONE -HALF INCHES (1-1/2") PRINCIPALSTROKE WIDTH.3. BE LOCATED ABOVE ANY EAVES OR WALKWAY COVERINGS, IF POSSIBLE.4. FACE THE STREET IN WHICH IT IS ADDRESS, IF POSSIBLE.5. BUILDING WITH MULTIPLE UNITS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED WITH UNITSNUMBERS AT BOTH FRONT AND REAR ENTRANCES.6. BUILDING WITH MULTIPLE ADDRESS SHALL ALSO HAVE THE ADDRESSNUMBERS ON THE REAR DOOR. (REAR DOOR NUMBERS ARE NOTREQUIRED TO BE ILLUMINATED IF REFLECTORIZED.7. UNIT NUMBERS AND REAR DOOR BUILDING NUMBERS SHALL BE ATLEAST FOUR INCHES (4") IN HEIGHT.

Attachment 4
89 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
90 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Ashlan and DeWolf – Justification Memo

TO: Clovis City Council

FROM: Kelsey George, Precision Civil Engineering

RE: General Plan Amendment and Rezone Applications for APN: 555-042-70

DATE: March 6, 2023

Executive Summary
Precision Civil Engineering has prepared this document on behalf of Harpreet Sumal (Applicant) and pertains to approximately 1.62 acres of the property located at the northwest corner of Ashlan and DeWolf Avenues (APN 555-042-70). The site is zoned R- A with a planned land use of Low Density Residential (2.1 – 4 du/ac). The Applicant proposes a general plan amendment and corresponding rezone to facilitate the development of a 26- unit multi -family residential development which would result in a density of 16 dwelling units per acre. The resulting general plan land use designation is proposed to be High Density Residential (15.1 – 25.0 du/ac) with a corresponding zone district of R-3.

Justification Memorandum
Pursuant to the City of Clovis Submittal requirements for General Plan Amendments , a letter of justification explaining in detail the request to change the General Plan. This memo identifies key goals, policies, and objectives that support the requested land use change, as well as justification for each required finding needed to approve a General Plan Amendment (GPA) pursuant to the Clovis Municipal Code (CMC).

General Plan:

Provided below are goals directly from the Clovis General Plan and discussion on how the project meets these goals:

Goal 5 : A city with ho using, employment, and lifestyle opportunities for all ages and incomes of residents.

Policy 5.2 Encourage a mixture of both ownership and rental options to meet varied preferences and income affordability needs.

The Project would contribute to the attainment of General Plan Goal 5 by providing higher density residential to accommodate a more diverse population of income levels. Further, the development would provide rental options for suitable to different stages in a person’s life. The Project proposes 26 market -rate housing units to an area that does not have a mix of housing opportunities. The Project presents an opportunity for the City to provide Attachment 5
91 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Ashlan and DeWolf – Justification Memo
resources outlined in this General Plan goal and associated policy.

Goal 6: A city that grows and develops in a manner that implements its vision, sustains the integrity of its guiding principles, and requires few and infrequent amendments to the General Plan.

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:

1. The proposed change is and will be fiscally neutral or positive.

The proposed Project will be fiscally positive for the City over time. Using the multi- family residential project on Ashlan and Temperance Avenues (approximately 1 mile west of the proposed Project) to approximate as a comparable site, we can determine a projected assessed tax value. According to Zillow 1, the property’s
assessed value was $491,878 prior to operation and development of the multifamily in 2014. The assessed value of the property according the Fresno County Assessed Value Lookup
2, the property was valued at $9,959,777 as of
January 1, 2022. Once the multifamily was built, the assessed value jumped to a 1750.1% increase in value.

Using the same Assessor’s Office Information , the subject property is valued at $816,000. Even with a very conservative projection of 500% increase in value with improvements and development, we can extrapolate a minimum of $4.08 million value at the time of occupancy. Since property taxes are directly correlated with property values, this translates into an increase of tax revenue for the City with the proposed land use change.

2. 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.

The proposed Project can be adequately served by public facilities and would not negatively impact service on existing development or the ability to service future development. As part of the request to change the land use , sewer and water studies were required to be completed by a third party and determined that adequate capacity existed to support the proposed multi-family residential project at 26-units. It is expected that the Project will be required to construct any required on- and off-site improvements in order to service the proposed dwelling units.

3. The proposed change is consistent with the Urban Village Neighborhood Concept

1 https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2617-Ashlan-Ave-Clovis-CA-93611/119596038_zpid/, accessed on 2/28/2023. 2 https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/assessor/assessed-value-lookup, accessed on 2/28/2023. 92 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Ashlan and DeWolf – Justification Memo
when within an Urban Center

The proposed land use change is within the Loma Vista Urban Center and is consistent with Urban Village Neighborhood Concept . The proposed Project is located within the Loma Vista Specific Plan area, which imposes requirements on the development beyond those identified in the General Plan or the Clovis Municipal Code. These requirements include a 30- foot paseo and an integrated lotting pattern depicting the trail’s overall connection with adjacent neighborhoods and a neighborhood gateway at the corner for uniformity with the two adjacent intersections on the south side of Ashlan Avenue. These features make the proposed Project consistent with the Urban Village Neighborhood Concept on a property that likely would not develop and provide these public amenities without a land use change.

4. General Plan amendments proposing a change from industrial, mixed- use business campus, or office (employment generating) land use designations to non- employment-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.

This criteria is not applicable since the request is not a change from industrial, mixed-use business campus, or office land use designations. It is residential to residential.

Clovis Municipal Code Findings:

Pursuant to CMC Section 9.86.060 of the CMC, there are several required findings in place in order to approve a GPA. These findings are intended to prevent the approval of a project inconsistent with the goals and visions of the City.

The Project will meet all of the required findings for a General Plan Amendment:

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

Although the proposed Project requires a general plan amendment, it is internally consistent with goals, policies and actions of the General Plan. As identified in Goal 5, the General Plan seeks to create housing opportunities that include ownership and rental options to accommodate the lifestyles of all residents. The proposed Project would contribute 26 market value multi -family units that provide a more affordable housing option to residents who struggle with home ownership attainment. These units would further the aforementioned goals of the General Plan by facilitating development to make these housing opportunities possible. 93 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Ashlan and DeWolf – Justification Memo

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

The proposed Project would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or general welfare of the City . It is expected the Project will actually serve the public interest by providing varied housing types that promote the City’s General Plan goals by providing more diverse housing options. The proposed Project is also expected to be conditioned to comply with all applicable Municipal Code standards to protect public interest, health, safety, convenience, and general welfare. Furthermore, the technical studies done as required in compliance with CEQA indicated any potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project would be less than significant.

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

The proposed project is physically suitable to support the development as proposed. Despite physical constraints and city dedications, the site has been able to design the site to facilitate multi-family development. The Applicant discussed the potential of a commercial site and single- family development under the provision of SB9 but ultimately decided against it due to access and circulation issues. The site plan has been designed to be compatible with the adjoining single family residential developments and to minimize any perceived intrusiveness.

Additionally, as part of the request to change the land use sewer and water studies were required and determined that adequate capacity existed to support the proposed multi-family residential project at 26-units.

4. There is a compelling reason for the amendment.

This site has several development constraints that would prohibit it from developing with single family residential. The current land use allows a density of

2.1 – 4 dwelling units an acre which would result in up to six single family houses.

The existing zone district, R -A, has a development standard that requires the minimum lot width to be 110 feet. The site itself has approximate dimensions of +/- 300 feet on Ashlan Avenue by +/-257 feet on DeWolf Avenue. It would be impossible to design the site with six 110 -foot wide lots with 300 feet of frontage.

This barrier is coupled with the limited access on Ashlan Avenue which would typically prohibit six drive approaches onto the arterial roadway. In addition, there are several dedication obligations required of the Project which include dedications for street right-of-way on DeWolf Avenue, trail dedication on Ashlan Avenue, and the neighborhood gateway right at the corner of the intersection. 94 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Ashlan and DeWolf – Justification Memo
Environmental Impacts
The Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and therefore required to assess and mitigate all potential environmental impacts. The Project provided all the requested technical studies to support the preparation of the applicable environmental assessment from a third-party consultant. The studies include:
• Historic Resources Evaluation
• Air Quality / Greenhouse Gas Memorandum
• Archaeological Resources Survey Assessment
• Trip Generation and Vehicle Miles Travelled Memorandum • Biological Resource Assessment
These studies were prepared by LSA, a local environmental consulting firm. Although the City has not yet prepared the environmental assessment, the technical studies indicate that with the proposed increase in density, the project will not have significant impacts on the environment.

Conclusion

As described above, the land use change of approximately 1.62 acres on the northwest corner of Ashlan and DeWolf Avenues meets housing goals of the City’s General Plan. It would also comply with the required criteria in the Clovis Municipal Code without hav ing any significant impacts on the environment as it relates to the factors included in Appendix G of the CEQA Statute and G uidelines. As an infill development, a land use change to facilitate a 26-unti multi-family residential development is a suitable use for the property that meets the intent and vision of the City.
95 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Entitlement: GPA 2023-002
Description: Low to High Density Residential
Applicant: Harpreet Singh Sumal
Property Location: 3182 DeWolf Avenue
APN: 555-042-70

ENGINEERING / PUBLIC UTILITIES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

(Sean Smith, Engineering Representative - 324-2363)
(Paul Armendariz, Public Utilities Representative – 324-2649)

1. The applicant shall provide a City Engineer approved sewer study to determine if there is sewer capacity to serve the proposed property as a result of the increase in density.

2. The applicant shall provide a City Engineer approved water study to determine if there is sufficient water pressure to meet the fire suppression requirement of the Clovis Fire Department and adequate water supply, pressure, and to determine what improvemen ts are needed to serve this property, prior to application of subsequent entitlements, as a result of the increase in density.

Attachment 6
96 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Entitlement: R 2023-002
Description: 1.62 Acres from R-A to R-3
Applicant: Harpreet Singh Sumal
Property Location: 3182 DeWolf Avenue
APN: 555-042-70

ENGINEERING / PUBLIC UTILITIES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

(Sean Smith, Engineering Representative - 324-2363)
(Paul Armendariz, Public Utilities Representative – 324-2649)

No Conditions

97 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

June 12, 2023

McKencie Perez
City of Clovis
Department of Planning and Development Services
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA, 93612

Project: General Plan Amendment 2023-002 and Rezone 2023-002 for 26-unit multi-family apartments

District CEQA Reference No: 20230490

Dear Ms. Perez:

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the General Plan Amendment and Rezone (GPA/RE) from the City of Clovis (City) for multi-family apartments. Per the GPA/RE, the project consists of 26-unit multi-family apartments (Project). The Project is located at 3182 DeWolf Avenue, in Clovis, CA.

The District offers the following comments regarding the Project:

Project Related Emissions

At the federal level under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the District is designated as extreme nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standards and serious nonattainment for the particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) standards. At the state level under California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the District is designated as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone, PM10, PM2.5 standards.

Based on information provided to the District, Project specific annual criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation are not expected to exceed any of the significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI):
https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf.

98 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

Construction Emissions

The District recommends, to reduce impacts from construction-related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available off-road construction equipment, including the latest tier equipment.

Health Risk Screening/Assessment

The City should evaluate the risk associated with the Project for sensitive receptors (residences, businesses, hospitals, day-care facilities, health care facilities, etc.) in the area and mitigate any potentially significant risk to help limit exposure of sensitive receptors to emissions.

To determine potential health impacts on surrounding receptors (residences, businesses, hospitals, day-care facilities, health care facilities, etc.) a Prioritization and/or a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) should be performed for the Project. These health risk determinations should quantify and characterize potential Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) identified by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment/California Air Resources Board (OEHHA/CARB) that pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

Health risk analyses should include all potential air emissions from the project, which include emissions from construction of the project, including multi-year construction, as well as ongoing operational activities of the project. Note, two common sources of TACs can be attributed to diesel exhaust emitted from heavy-duty off-road earth moving equipment during construction, and from ongoing operation of heavy-duty on-road trucks.

Prioritization (Screening Health Risk Assessment):

A “Prioritization” is the recommended method for a conservative screening-level health risk assessment. The Prioritization should be performed using the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) methodology.

The District recommends that a more refined analysis, in the form of an HRA, be performed for any project resulting in a Prioritization score of 10 or greater. This is because the prioritization results are a conservative health risk representation, while the detailed HRA provides a more accurate health risk evaluation.

To assist land use agencies and project proponents with Prioritization analyses, the District has created a prioritization calculator based on the aforementioned CAPCOA guidelines, which can be found here:
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/pto/emission_factors/Criteria/Toxics/Utilities/PRIORI TIZATION-CALCULATOR.xls

99 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

Health Risk Assessment:

Prior to performing an HRA, it is strongly recommended that land use agencies/ project proponents develop and submit for District review a health risk modeling protocol that outlines the sources and methodologies that will be used to perform the HRA. This step will ensure all components are addressed when performing the HRA.

A development project would be considered to have a potentially significant health risk if the HRA demonstrates that the project-related health impacts would exceed the District’s significance threshold of 20 in a million for carcinogenic risk, or 1.0 for either the Acute or Chronic Hazard Indices.

A project with a significant health risk would trigger all feasible mitigation measures.

The District strongly recommends that development projects that result in a significant health risk not be approved by the land use agency.

The District is available to review HRA protocols and analyses. For HRA submittals please provide the following information electronically to the District for review:

 HRA (AERMOD) modeling files
 HARP2 files
 Summary of emissions source locations, emissions rates, and emission factor calculations and methodologies.

For assistance, please contact the District’s Technical Services Department by:

 E-Mailing inquiries to: [email protected]
 Calling (559) 230-5900

Recommended Measure: Development projects resulting in TAC emissions should be located an adequate distance from residential areas and other sensitive receptors in accordance to CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective located at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/resource- center/strategy-development/land-use-resources.

Ambient Air Quality Analysis

An Ambient Air Quality Analysis (AAQA) uses air dispersion modeling to determine if emissions increases from a project will cause or contribute to a violation of State or National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The District recommends an AAQA be performed for the Project if emissions exceed 100 pounds per day of any pollutant.

100
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 4 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

An acceptable analysis would include emissions from both project-specific permitted and non-permitted equipment and activities. The District recommends consultation with District staff to determine the appropriate model and input data to use in the analysis.

Specific information for assessing significance, including screening tools and modeling guidance, is available online at the District’s website:
www.valleyair.org/ceqa.

Clean Lawn and Garden Equipment in the Community

Since the Project consists of residential development, gas-powered residential lawn and garden equipment have the potential to result in an increase of NOx and PM2.5 emissions. Utilizing electric lawn care equipment can provide residents with immediate economic, environmental, and health benefits. The District recommends the Project proponent consider the District’s Clean Green Yard Machines (CGYM) program which provides incentive funding for replacement of existing gas powered lawn and garden equipment. More information on the District CGYM program and funding can be found at: http://www.valleyair.org/grants/cgym.htm and http://valleyair.org/grants/cgym-commercial.htm.

On-Site Solar Deployment

It is the policy of the State of California that renewable energy resources and zero- carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045. While various emission control techniques and programs exist to reduce air quality emissions from mobile and stationary sources, the production of solar energy is contributing to improving air quality and public health. The District suggests that the City consider incorporating solar power systems as an emission reduction strategy for the Project.

Electric Vehicle Chargers

To support and accelerate the installation of electric vehicle charging equipment and development of required infrastructure, the District offers incentives to public agencies, businesses, and property owners of multi-unit dwellings to install electric charging infrastructure (Level 2 and 3 chargers). The purpose of the District’s Charge Up! Incentive program is to promote clean air alternative-fuel technologies and the use of low or zero-emission vehicles. The District recommends that the City and project proponents install electric vehicle chargers at project sites, and at strategic locations.

Please visit www.valleyair.org/grants/chargeup.htm for more information.

101
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 5 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

District Rules and Regulations

The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes.

The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: www.valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888.

District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)

The District has reviewed the information provided and has determined the project size is below the District Rule 9510, section 2.1 applicability threshold of 50 dwelling units for a residential development. Therefore, District Rule 9510 requirements and related fees do not apply to the project.

District Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings)

The Project will be subject to District Rule 4601 since it is expected to utilize architectural coatings. Architectural coatings are paints, varnishes, sealers, or stains that are applied to structures, portable buildings, pavements or curbs.

The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings.

In addition, this rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup and labeling requirements. Additional information on how to comply with District Rule 4601 requirements can be found online at:
http://www.valleyair.org/rules/currntrules/r4601.pdf

District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)

The project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities.

102
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 6 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). Also, should the project result in the disturbance of 5- acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional information regarding the written notification or Dust Control Plan requirements, please contact District Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950.

The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at:
https://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/forms/DCP-Form.docx

Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at:
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/pm10/compliance_pm10.htm

District Rule 4901 - Wood Burning Fireplaces and Heaters

The purpose of this rule is to limit emissions of carbon monoxide and particulate matter from wood burning fireplaces, wood burning heaters, and outdoor wood burning devices. This rule establishes limitations on the installation of new wood burning fireplaces and wood burning heaters.

Specifically, at elevations below 3,000 feet in areas with natural gas service, no person shall install a wood burning fireplace, low mass fireplace, masonry heater, or wood burning heater.

Information about District Rule 4901 can be found online at:
http://valleyair.org/rule4901/

Other District Rules and Regulations

The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations).

103
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 7 of 7 District Reference No: 20230490
June 12, 2023

District Comment Letter

The District recommends that a copy of the District’s comments be provided to the Project proponent.

If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Eric McLaughlin by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 230-5808.

Sincerely,

Brian Clements
Director of Permit Services

For: Mark Montelongo
Program Manager

104
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
105
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
106
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
107
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
108
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

County of Fresno

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

Promotion, preservation and protection of the community’s health 1221 Fulton Street /P. O. Box 11867, Fresno, CA 93775
(559) 600-3271 ・ FAX (559) 600-7629
The County of Fresno is an Equal Employment Opportunity Employer www.co.fresno.ca.us ・ www.fcdph.org

August 27, 2021
LU0021417
2604
Kelsey George, Assistant Planner
City of Clovis
Planning and Development Services Department
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612

Dear Ms. George

PROJECT NUMBER: DRC-21-00040

DRC-21-00040, A planned development of a 28-unit apartment complex.

APN: 555-042-70 ZONING: R-1-MD ADDRESS: 3182 N. Dewolf Avenue

Recommended Conditions of Approval for Residential Uses:

 Construction permits for the proposed development should be su bject to assurance of sewer capacity of the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. Concurrence should be obtained from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). For more information, contact staff at (559) 445-5116.

 Construction permits for the proposed development should be su bject to assurance that the City of Clovis community water system has the capacity and quality to serve this project. Concurrence should be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water- Southern Branch. For more information call (559) 447-3300.

 If the applicant proposes to use and/or store hazardous materi als and/or hazardous wastes, they shall meet the requirements set forth in the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), Division 20, Chapter 6.95, and the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Division 4.5. Any business that handles a hazardous material or hazardous waste may be required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), Division 20, Chapter 6.95, Section 25507 (http://cers.calepa.ca.gov/). Contact the Fresno County Hazmat Compliance Program at (559) 600-3271 for more information.

 The proposed construction project has the potential to expose nearby residents to elevated noise levels. Consideration should be given to your City’s municipal code.

 As a measure to protect ground water, all water wells and/or s eptic systems that exist or have been abandoned within the project area should be properly destroyed by an appropriately licensed contractor.

109
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Kelsey George
August 27, 2021
DRC-21-00040

Page 2 of 2 ends

2  Should any underground storage tank(s) be found during the pro ject, the applicant shall apply for and secure an Underground Storage Tank Removal Permit from the Fresno County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division. Contact the Fresno County Hazmat Compliance Program at (559) 600-3271 for more information.

The following comments pertain to the demolition of any existing structures:

 Should the structure(s) have an active rodent or insect infest ation, the infestation should be abated prior to demolition of the structure(s) in order to prevent the spread of vectors to adjacent properties.

 In the process of demolishing the existing structure(s), the c ontractor may encounter asbestos containing construction materials and materials coated with lead-based paints.

 If asbestos containing materials are encountered, contact the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District at (559) 230-6000 for more information.

 If the structure(s) were constructed prior to 1979 or if lead- based paint is suspected to have been used in these structure(s), then prior to demolition work the contractor should contact the following agencies for current regulations and requirements:

 California Department of Public Health, Childhood Lead Poisoni ng Prevention Branch, at (510) 620-5600.

 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, at (4 15) 947-8000.

 State of California, Industrial Relations Department, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, Consultation Service (CAL-OSHA) at (559) 454-5302.

REVIEWED BY:

Kevin Tsuda, R.E.H.S.

Environmental Health Specialist II ( 559) 600-33271

cc: Deep Sidhu- Environmental Health Division (CT. 59.11) Harpreet Sumal- Applicant ([email protected])
110
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

OFFICE MEMO

DATE: 6/01/2023

TO: Joyce Roach

FROM: Fresno County Transportation Planning

SUBJECT: GPA2023-002 and R2023-002

PROJECT OVERVIEW:

GPA2023-002; A request to amend the General Plan fo r a parcel from Low Density Residential to High Den sity Residential.

Harpreet Singh Sumal, applicant/owner. This request is being processed concurrently with R2023-002.

Table A: ITE Trip Generation (220 Multifamily Housi ng {Low Rise})

Land Use/Project Dwelling Units
Weekday A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Total Rate Total Rate Total
GPA2023-002 26 6.74 175 .47 12 .57 15
Total Net New Project
Trips
+175 +12 +15

COMMENTS/ MITIGATION:

Per the provided project information
this project is likely to impact county facilities and
should require a TIS, please include the count in all future routings best point of contact is [email protected]. Using ITE trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) trips are calculated to be over the county's threshold.

If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Hector Luna at [email protected]

Sincerely,

Hector Luna
Senior Planner

111
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
1 General Plan Amendment GPA2023-002 &
Rezone R2023-002
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

December 2023

PREPARED BY:

McKencie Perez
Senior Planner
Planning & Development Services
(559) 324-2310
[email protected]

Attachment 7
112
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

2 INITIAL STUDY

This Initial Study was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq ., CEQA Guidelines Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations.

PROJECT TITLE: GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Clovis
Planning & Development Services
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612

CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE
NUMBER:

McKencie Perez, Senior Planner
(559) 324-2310
[email protected]

PROJECT LOCATION: 3182 De Wolf Avenue
Clovis, CA 93619
APN: 555-042-70

PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND
ADDRESS:

Harpreet Singh Sumal
3182 De Wolf Avenue
Clovis, CA 93619

LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing – Low Density Residential & Open Space Proposed – High Density Residential

ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing – R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density) Proposed – R-3 (Multifamily High Density)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION See page 7 of this Initial Study

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND
SETTING:

See page 6 of this Initial Study
REQUIRED APPROVALS: See page 8 of this Initial Study

HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN
TRIBES REQUESTED CONSULTATION? IF
SO, HAS CONSULTATION BEGUN?
Tribes did not request consultation.

113
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .......................................................................... 5 B. PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................... 6 C. PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................................... 6 D. EXISTING SETTING ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 6 Surrounding Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 6 Land Use Designation........................................................................................................................... 6 Zoning Designation ............................................................................................................................... 7 E. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 7 Project Entitlements .............................................................................................................................. 7 Project Construction and Phasing ......................................................................................................... 7 Site Preparation .................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Components ............................................................................................................................. 7 F. REQUIRED PROJECT APPROVALS ............................................................................................................. 8 G. TECHNICAL STUDIES ................................................................................................................................... 9 H. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................................................................................. 15

1. Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................................... 15

2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources.................................................................................................... 17

3. Air Quality ........................................................................................................................................... 19

4. Biological Resources .......................................................................................................................... 23

5. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................. 26

6. Energy ................................................................................................................................................ 28

7. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................... 29

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................................... 32

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................................... 34

10. Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................................................................. 37

11. Land Use and Planning....................................................................................................................... 40

12. Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 41

13. Noise................................................................................................................................................... 42

14. Population and Housing ...................................................................................................................... 44

15. Public Services ................................................................................................................................... 45

16. Recreation .......................................................................................................................................... 46

17. Transportation ..................................................................................................................................... 47

18. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................... 49

19. Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................................. 51

20. Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................ 53

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................................... 55 I. REPORT PREPARATION ............................................................................................................................. 57 114
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

4 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: PROJECT LOCATION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................... 10 FIGURE 2: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION ............................................................................................................................. 11 FIGURE 3: ZONING ........................................................................................................................................................................ 12 FIGURE 4: CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ................................................................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 5: CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 14

115
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
5 A. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, as indicated by the checklist and corresponding discussion in this Initial Study.

Aesthetics Agriculture & Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology & Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology & Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities & Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

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

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

I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environmental, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) will be prepared.

I find that the proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environmental, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable le gal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.

An EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

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

Prepared By:

______________________________ ____________________
McKencie Perez, MPA, Senior Planner Date
Planning & Development Services
City of Clovis

Approved By:

______________________________ ____________________
Renee Mathis, Director Date
Planning & Development Services
City of Clovis

116
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

6 B. PROJECT OVERVIEW
Kelsey George of Precision Civil Engineering (applicant) proposes to redesignate the subject property from the Low Density Residential and Open Space land use designations to the High Density Residential land use designation. The applicant also proposes to rezone the subject property from the R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density) zone district to the R -3 (Multifamily High Density) zone district. These applications will facilitate the development of a 26-unit multifamily residential complex. The complex will include site improvements (i.e., landscaping, parking, sidewalks, and utilities infrastructure). The project shall be referred to throughout the document as “proposed Project” and/or “Project.” Details regarding the Project and operations are described more throughout the Initial Study, beginning under Section E.

The subject property is approximately 1.62 acres and is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues in the City of Clovis, California.

C. PROJECT LOCATION
As shown in Figure 1 below, the Project is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues and is approximately 1.62 acres in area. The Project will occupy the entire parcel with Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 555-042-70.

D. EXISTING SETTING
This section describes the existing conditions, surrounding conditions, as well as the General Plan land use and zoning designations.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
As shown in Figure 1 below, the site is developed with a single-family residence and swimming pool. The residence is currently occupied. The rest of the site is undeveloped.

SURROUNDING CONDITIONS
As referenced below in Table 1 , and shown on Figure 1, the Project site is surrounded by existing residential development to the north, west, and south and a school to the east.

Table 1: Surrounding Land Uses

Land Use Designation Existing Zoning* Existing Land Use North Low Density Residential R-A Single-Family Residence East School and Open Space P-F School
South Low Density Residential and Open
Space
R-1-7500 Single-Family Residences
West Low Density Residential and Open
Space
R-A Single-Family Residence
*R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density), P-F (Public Facilities), R-1-7500 (Single-Family Residential – 7,500 square feet)

LAND USE DESIGNATION
As shown on Figure 2, the Project site has existing General Plan Land Use designations of Low Density Residential and Open Space. The Low Density Residential designation allows for single-family residential development at a density of 2.1 to 4.0 dwelling units per acre and the Open Space designation allows passive and active opens space (i.e., trails) . The applicant proposes to amend the General Plan Land Use to High Density Residential that allows for residential development with a density of 15.1 – 25.0 dwelling units per acre.
117
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
7 ZONING DESIGNATION
As shown on Figure 3, the Project site is currently zoned R-A (Single-Family Residential Very Low Density), however, proposes a rezone to the R-3 Zone District (Multifamily High Density). The R-3 Zone District is consistent with the proposed High Density land use designation.

E. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject parcel is a ± 1.62 acre urban in-fill property designated for Low Density Residential development in the City of Clovis General Plan. The applicant is proposing to redesignate and rezone the project site to allow for the development of a multifamily complex. The Project proposes 26 apartment units that are all designated for market rate rent. The Project consists of three buildings to accommodate the 26 units, two carport structures for parking, associated landscaping, and utility and pedestrian infrastructure.

This section describes the components of the proposed Project in more detail, including site preparations, proposed structures, and on- and off- site improvements.

PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
The Project would include several planning entitlements, including a general plan amendment, rezone, and multiple family design review. The general plan amendment is to redesignate the property from the Low Density Residential designation to the High Densi ty Residential designation, the rezone is to bring the zoning into consistency with the proposed general plan land use designation, and the multiple family design review is required to memorialize the design and layout of the buildings (to be submitted at a later date).

PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND PHASING
The Project is anticipated to begin construction spring of 2024 with full buildout by winter of 2025.

SITE PREPARATION
Site preparation would include the demolition of the existing structure and filling of the swimming pool and typical grading activities to ensure an adeuqatley graded site for drainage purposes. Part of the preparation would include the removal of any vegetation, crops, and trees necessary to accommodate the Project. Other site preparation activities would i nclude minor excavation for the installation of utility infrastructure, for coneyance of water, sewer, stormwater, and irrigation.

PROJECT COMPONENTS
This section describes the overall components of the Project, such as the proposed buildings, landscape, vehicle and pedestrian circulation, and utilities.

DEMOLITION
The existing residence will be demolished to accommodate the Project.

CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT AND ELEVATIONS
While this section discusses the general site layout and elevations, it is important to note that the actual site will be reviewed more fully during the City’s Multi-Family Design Review process. As shown in Figure 4, the Project proposes construction of three buildings to accommodate the 26 apartment units. There will also be two structures designated for carports. The apartment buildings are situated towards the street frontages and center of the site, while the carport structures and parking are towards the rear of the site, along the north and west elevations.

Conceptual elevations for the apartment building are shown in Figure 5, respectively. As shown, the apartment building is two stories. Although conceptual at this time, the exterior includes a mixture stucco, 118
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

8 wood siding and stone veneer. Development of the project will be in accordance with the City of Clovis’ Multifamily Objective Standards and the R-3 Zone District standards.

SITE CIRCULATION AND PARKING
The Project would be accessed via two (2) points of ingress/egress from Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues.

On-site parking would be provided per the Clovis Municipal Code (CMC) standards for parking spaces for multi-family development. Although 60 vehicle spaces are proposed, the final parking calculation will be reviewed during the City’s Multi -Family Design Review process. Installation of pedestrian paths of travel would be required as part of the Project from the Ashlan and De Wolf Avenue frontages. Although the details have not yet been provided, these features would be per City of Clovis Development Code standards and/or in compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. There will also be a gateway entrance at the southeast area of the site.

LANDSCAPE
The Project would include landscape throughout the site. Landscaped areas would generally be located along the frontage of each structure where a variety of ornamental shrubs, plants, and trees would be planted, as well as landscape in areas throughout the parking lots, consistent with the CMC. Landscape plans are typically provided during the City’s Multi -Family Design Review process at which time the proposed landscape would be reviewed for compliance with the City’s water efficient landscape regulations and guidelines.

UTILITIES
Utilities for the site would consist of water, sewer, electric, cable, gas, and stormwater infrastructure.

Minor trenching and digging activities would be required for the installation of necessary pipelines typical of development. All utility plans would be required to be reviewed and approved by the appropriate agency, and/or department to ensure that installation occurs to pertinent codes and regulations. Other infrastructure would include new fire hydrants as required by the City of Clovis Fire Department.

Utilities are provided by and managed from a combination of agencies, including the Fresno Irrigation District (FID), which provides the City’s water supply which is then supplied to customers by the City of Clovis, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) which has responsibility for storm water management, and the City’s public utilities department which prov ides for solid waste collection, and sewer collection services. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides electricity and natural gas within t he City of Clovis.

F. REQUIRED PROJECT APPROVALS
The City of Clovis requires the following review, permits, and/or approvals for the proposed Project; however, other approvals not listed below may be required as identified throughout the entitlement process:

• General Plan Amendment
• Rezone
• Multi-Family Design Review
• Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Sign Permit
• San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District
• Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District
119
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
9 G. TECHNICAL STUDIES
The analysis of the Project throughout this Initial Study relied in part on the technical studies listed below prepared for the Project, as well as other sources, including, but not limited to, the 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, departmental staff, California Department of Conservation, and the California Department of Toxic Control Substances.

• Appendix A: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum dated October 13, 2023 • Appendix B: Biological Resources Assessment dated August 2022 • Appendix C: Archaeological Resources Survey Assessment dated August 22, 2022 • Appendix D: Water Infrastructure Investigation dated September 1, 2023 • Appendix E: Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis dated August 22, 2022 • Appendix F: Historical Resources Evaluation dated August 23, 2022 • Appendix G: Wastewater Service Study dated September 5, 2023, and amended October 27, 2023

120
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

10 Figure 1: Project Location and Existing Conditions

121
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
11 Figure 2: General Plan Land Use Designations

122
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

12 Figure 3: Zoning

123
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
13 Figure 4: Conceptual Site Plan

124
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

14 Figure 5: Conceptual Elevations

125
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
15 H. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This section provides an evaluation of the potential environ mental impacts of the proposed p roject and are based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. For each issue area, one of four conclusions is made:

• No Impact: No project-related impact to the environment would occur with project development. • Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not result in a substantial and adverse change in the environment. This impact level does not require mitigation measures. • Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated : The proposed project would result in an environmental impact or effect that is potentially significant, but the incorporation of mitigation measure(s) would reduce the project-related impact to a less than significant level. • Potentially Significant Impact: The proposed project would result in an environmental impact or effect that is potentially significant, and no mitigation can be identified that would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

1. AESTHETICS

Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial effect on a scenic vista? X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
X
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the
site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in
an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of Clovis is located within the San Joaquin Valley. Thus, much of the City and its surrounding areas are predominately flat. As a result, on clear days, the Sierra Nevada Mountains are visible to the east depending on your location. Aside from Sierra Nevada, there are no officially designated focal points or viewsheds within the City. However, Policy 2.3, Visual Resources, of the Open Space Element of the 2014 Clovis General Plan, requires maintaining public views of open spaces, parks, and natural features and to preserve Clovis’ viewshed of the surrounding foothills.

As mentioned above in the Project Description, the site is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues . In general, the Project site is within an urbanized area of the City surrounded by existing residential to the north, west and south, as well as a school east of the site. As a result, the area is characterized 126
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

16 by a mix of development types and uses, as well as typical infrastructure, such as roadways, streetlights, parking lot lights, and ambient light sources typical of residential development.

DISCUSSION

Would the project have a substantial effect on a scenic vista?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned above, there are no officially designated scenic vistas or focal points in the City of Clovis. While the Sierra Nevada Mountains can be viewed on clear days, the Project would be consistent with the proposed R -3 zone district standards , which allows structures to be constructed at a maximum height of 35 feet. General Plan Policy 2.3 requires that public views of open spaces, parks, and natural features be maintained; however, the Project site is not within the imme diate vicinity of these features.

Therefore, the Project shall be constructed at a maximum height consistent with the proposed R-3 Zone District and surrounding R-A Zone District development standards, a less-than-significant impact would occur with regards to the Project having a substantial effect on a scenic vista.

Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?

No Impact. As stated in the 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, there are no Caltrans-designated scenic highways within the City of Clovis.1 Further, there are no existing historical structures or rock outcroppings located on or within the immediate vicinity of the site, therefore, the Project would result in no impact with regards to substantially damaging scenic resources within a State scenic highway.

Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings ? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned previously, the existing site is within an urbanized area surrounded by primarily residential land uses and a school. Thus, the area is generally characterized by different types of structurers at varying heights, design, and character. The Project proposes to construct three buildings to accommodate the 26 units, as well as two structures for carports. Such uses would not substantially degrade from the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Further, as mentioned above, there are no officially designated scenic areas in the City, and none specifically at or surrounding the site itself.

In addition, the Project structures would be within the permitted height under the proposed R-3 Zone District and surrounding R-A Zone District. Thus, the Project is within the scale and character of the area and would not substantially degrade the existing visual character. Lastly, the Project would undergo a site plan review through the Multi-Family Design Review process, which would ensure that the overall design and character is consistent and/or complements the surrounding areas. The process will ensure the Project complies with relevant design policies, such as General Plan, Multifamily Objective Standards, and the Clovis Development Code. During the review, the height, color and materials are reviewed for consistency w ith these plans and guidelines.

Consequently, a less-than-significant impact would occur with regards to substantially degrading the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings.

1 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, June 2014, Page 5.1-1.
127
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
17 Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. The Project consists of a multifamily residential complex. The proposed Project would introduce new sources of light and glare. Light and glare from t he Project would be typical of a multifamily residential type of development, which may include sources such as exterior lighting for safety, and light and glare from vehicles reflecting from surfaces such as windshields. Other sources of light would be the interior lighting of the buildings at night. These sources of light and glare are not typically associated with causing significant effects on the environment. Further, the site is already surrounded by existing uses, such as single-family residences and a school, which as a result has established existing sources of light and glare. These sources of existing light and glare are comprised of streetlights, exterior and interior light and glare from existing homes, and from vehicles going to and from the neighborhood. Other sources of existing light and glare derive from vehicles travelling along Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues.

Although the Project would introduce new s ources of light and glare, the Multi-Family Design Review process would ensure that the design and placement of lighting is appropriate to minimize potential light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. In addition, compliance with Mitigation Measure AES -1 would ensure that light and glare impacts be less-than-significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure AES-1: The Project shall comply with Section 9.22.050, Exterior Light and Glare, of the Clovis Municipal Code, which requires light sources to be shielded and that lighting does not spillover to adjacent properties.

2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non -
agricultural use.

X
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220
(g)) or timberland (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 4526)?
X
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
X
e. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non -agricultural use or
X
128
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

18 conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues and considered an in-fill property. The site is within an urbanized area of the City and is surrounded by a mix of existing development types.

DISCUSSION

Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

No Impact. The project site is not Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland). The site is designated as Rural Residential Land by the Department of Conservation. 2 The Project site is currently used as a single-family residence. The Project proposes to redevelop the site as a multifamily residential complex.

Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?

No Impact. As shown in Figure 5.2-2 of the Agricultural Resources Chapter of the 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, the Project site is not under a Williamson Act Contract. Further, the site is not currently zoned or designated for agricultural use. As a result, the Project would have no impact with regards to conflicting with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract.

Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g)) or timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code section 4526)?

No Impact. The Project site does not contain forest land. Further, the site is not zoned for forestry or other forestry related uses. As a result, no impact would occur with regards to conflicts with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land.

Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

No Impact. See discussion under Section 2c.

Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non- forest use?

No Impact. See discussion under Section 2a.

2 Department of Conservation - https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, July 2023. 129
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
19 3. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? X
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non -
attainment under an applicable federal
or state ambient air quality standard?
X
c. Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations? X
d. Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
An Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum (AQ/GHG Memo) was prepared by LSA Associates Inc. (LSA) on October 13, 2023 (see Appendix A). Information in this AQ/GHG Memo is used for the analysis included in both the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions section of this Initial Study.

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
The City of Clovis (City) is in the central portion of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). SJVAB consists of eight counties: Fresno, Kern (western and central), Kings, Tulare, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus. The SJVAB is approximately 25,000 square miles. It is bordered by the Sierra Nevada in the east, the Coast Ranges in the west, and the Tehachapi mountains in the south. The valley is topographically flat with a slight downward gradient to the northwest. The valley opens to the sea at the Carquinez Straits where the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay.

Topography
The topography of a region is important for air quality because mountains can block airflow that would help disperse pollutants and can channel air from upwind areas that transports pollutants to downwind areas. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) covers the entirety of the SJVAB. The SJVAB is generally shaped like a bowl. It is open in the north and is sur rounded by mountain ranges on all other sides.

The Sierra Nevada mountains are along the eastern boundary (8,000 to 14,000 fe et in elevation), the Coast Ranges are along the western boundary (3,000 feet in elevation), and the Tehachapi Mountains are along the southern boundary (6,000 to 8,000 feet in elevation).

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

The subtropical high-pressure cell is strongest during spring, summer, and fall and produces subsiding air, which can result in temperature inversions in the valley. A temperature inversion can act like a lid, inhibiting vertical mixing of the air mass at the surface.

130
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

20 Any emissions of pollutants can be trapped below the inversion. Most of the surrounding mountains are above the normal height of summer inversions (1,500–3,000 feet).

Winter-time high pressure events can often last many weeks, with surface temperatures often lowering into the 30°F. During these events, fog can be present, and inversions are extremely strong. These wintertime inversions can inhibit vertical mixing of pollutants to a few hundred feet.

Ambient Air Quality Standards
The Clean Air Act (CAA) was passed in 1963 by the US Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 CAA amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for the regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including nonattainment requirements for areas not meeting National Air Quality Standards ( AAQS) and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 amendments represent the latest in a series of federal efforts to reg ulate the protection of air quality in the United States. The CAA allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollution species. The California Clean Air Act, signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the California AAQS by the earliest practical date. The California AAQS tend to be more restrictive than the National AAQS, based on even greater health and welfare concerns.

These National and California AAQS are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect “sensitive receptors,” those most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations consider ably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed.

Both California and the federal government have established health based AAQS for six air pollutants. As shown in Table 3, Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants, these pollutants are carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10). In addition, the state has set standards for sulfates and hydrogen sulfide. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety.

In addition to the criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants (TACs) are another group of pollutants of concern.

TACs are injurious in small quantities and are regulated despite the absence of criteria documents. The identification, regulation and monit oring of TACs is relatively recent compared to that for criteria pollutants.

Unlike criteria pollutants, TACs are regulated based on risk rather than specification of safe levels of contamination.

Attainment Status
The air quality management plans prepared by SJVAPCD provide the framework for SJVAB to achieve attainment of the state and federal AAQS through the State Implementation Plan . Areas are classified as attainment or nonattainment areas for pollutants, depending on whether they meet the ambient air quality standards. Nonattainment areas are imposed with additional restrictions as required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. There are different classifications for attainment and the s everity classifications for ozone nonattainment range in magnitude from marginal, moderate, and serious to severe and extreme. These classifications are used as a foundation to create air quality management strategies to improve air quality and comply with the National AAQS.

131
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
21 Table 2: Air Quality Attainment Status for Fresno County

Pollutant State Federal
Ozone (1-hour) Sever/Nonattainment Standard Revoked
Ozone (8-hour) Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment (Maintenance)
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment

Unclassified/Attainment
Lead Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Unclassified
Sulfates Attainment No Federal Regulation
Hydrogen Sulfide Unclassified No Federal Regulation

DISCUSSION

Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation . Although the CEQA Guidelines indicate that a significant impact would occur if the Project were to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, the SJVAPCDs 2015 Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts does no t provide specific guidance on analyzing conformity with the plan. Thus, for purposes of analyzing this potential impact, the AQ/GHG Memo considered impacts based on: (1) whether the Project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards; and (2) whether the Project will comply with applicable control measures in the air quality plan, primarily compliance with Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions and Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review.

In general, regional air quality impacts and attainment of standards are the result of the cumulative impacts of all emission sources within the air basin. Thus, individual projects are generally not large enough to contribute measurably to an existing violation or air quality standards alone. Therefore, in order to analyze this threshold, and because of the region’s existing nonattainment status for several pollutants, the Project would be considered to cause significant impacts if it were to generate emis sions that would exceed the SJVAPCD ’s significance thresholds. The District’s annual emission significance thresholds are as follows:

• 100 tons per year CO
• 10 tons per year NOx
• 10 tons per year ROG
• 27 tons per year Sox
• 15 tons per year PM10
• 15 tons per year PM2.5

Based on the AQ/GHG Memo, the Project would not exceed these thresholds from construction and operation of the Project (As Shown in Table 4).3 Further, any impacts related to the construction activities of the Project, such as dust control, would be regulated through the SJVAPCD, which require measures such as frequent watering of the site during construction to minimize dust.

3 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum, LSA, August 22, 2022. 132
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

22 Table 4: CO, NOx, ROG, PM10, PM2.5 Thresholds, Maximum

Emission Source (Tons Per Year) CO NOx ROG PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions 1.7 2.1 0.4 0.1 0.1
Operational Emissions 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Total Emissions 2.7 2.3 0.6 0.3 0.2
Significance Threshold 100 10 10 15 15
Exceed threshold – significant impact? No No No No No
Notes:

ROG = reactive organic gases
NOx = nitrous oxides
PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size

The SJVAPCD has reviewed the proposed project and determined the project size is below the Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) threshold, therefore the requirement of Rule 9510 do not apply . The Project will be subject to other air quality regulations, including Regulation V III (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), which requires a Construction Notification Form or approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to construction.

Consequently, implementation of mitigation measure AIR-1 would ensure that a less-than-significant impact with mitigation occurs.

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM 10 Prohibitions), the following controls are required to be included as specifications for the proposed project and implemented at the construction site:

• All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are note being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant or covered with a tarp or tother suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. • All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
• When materials are transported off site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
• All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.

Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
• Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
133
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
23 Would the project r esult in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. See discussion under Section 3a above.

Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation . Sensitive receptors are generally considered to include children, the elderly, and persons with pre -existing respiratory and cardiovascular illness. The SJVAPCD considers a sensitive receptor a location that houses or attracts children, the elderly, or peo ple with illnesses.

Examples of these receptors are hospitals, residences, schools and school facilities, and convalescent facilities.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site would be the existing r esidences adjacent to the site to the north and west, in addition to the school to the east.

Construction may expose the sensitive receptors to airborne particulates. A construction health risk assessment (HRA)4 was performed as part of the AQ/GHG Memo for the proposed project. Based on the HRA, unmitigated health risks from the project construction would exceed the SJVAPCD thresholds. With the implementation of mitigation measure AIR-2, construction of the proposed project would not exceed the SJVAPCD thresholds and would ensure that a less-than-significant impact with mitigation occurs.

Mitigation Measure AIR -2: During construction of the proposed project, the project contractor shall ensure all off-road diesel-powered construction equipment of 50 horsepower or more used for the project construction at a minimum meets the California Air Resources Board Tier 4 Final emissions standards or equivalent. Verification shall be provided to the City of Clovis for confirmation.

Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Generally, sources considered to emit odors are associated with wastewater treatment facilities, sanitary landfills, petroleum refineries, chemical manufacturing, and other industrial/manufacturing related uses. The Project would include a multifamily residential complex thus, is unlikely to produce odors that would be considered to adversely affect a substantial number of people. Further, there are no major odor-generating sources within screening distance of the site. Although some odors would be emitted through the construction of the Project, such as diesel fuel and exhaust from construction equipment, these odors would be temporary in nature and last only during construction activities. Further, the types of uses allowed in the R-3 zone district, such as a multifamily development, are not generally considered to be odor - causing uses that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. Overall, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
X

4 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum, LSA, October 13, 2023, pages 19-21. 134
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

24 regional plans, policies or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) was prepared by LSA in August 2022 (see Appendix B). This BRA included a literature review and records search to identify the existence and potential for occurrence of sensitive or special-status plant and animal species in the project vicinity. The site is flat and utilized as a single-family residence with portions of the undeveloped site supporting ruderal vegetation.

DISCUSSION

Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. As described in the BRA, the site was developed and is surrounded by substantial development. The site comprises of an existing single-family residence and no natural plant communities occur in the area of the Project site.5 No special-status wildlife species or diagnostic signs of special-status wildlife species were present on the Project site, however, may be marginally suitable for isolated habitat for several regionally occurring special -status species (burrowing owl and Swainson’s hawk) . Mature trees on the site could provide suitable nesting habitat for tree-nesting species. During the May 2022 survey of the site, there were no signs indicating occupation by these species.

5 Biological Resources Assessment prepared by LSA dated August 2022, page 7. 135
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
25 Implementation of mitigation measure BIO -1, BIO-2, and BIO -2a would ensure that a less-than-significant impact with mitigation occurs.

Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Conduct Preconstruction Clearance Surveys for Burrowing Owl . A preconstruction clearance survey is required for burrowing owl no more than 30 calendar days prior to initiation of project activities. All survey results must be delivered to the City of Clovis. If an active burrowing owl burrow is found within the pr oject site, the applicant must coordinate with California Department of Fish and Wildlif e (CDFW) to obtain applicable agency approval/direction prior to any ground direction prior to any ground disturbance activities on the site. Specific avoidance, den excavation, passive relocation, and compensatory mitigation activities shall be performed as required by CDFW. If no active burrowing owl burrows are identified, project activities may proceed as planned following the preconstruction survey.

Mitigation Measure BIO -2: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance . If vegetation trimming/removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to commence within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through September 30), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than five days prior to the start of such activities. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by project - related activities such as noise, vibration, increased human activity, and dust, etc. For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active by the qualified biologist. Documentation of all survey res ults shall be provided to the City.

Mitigation Measure BIO -2a: Compensatory Mitigation for Swainson’s Hawk. If an occupied Swainson’s hawk nest site is found within the project development limits during implementation of Mitigation Measure 2, the Applicant shall not proceed with any construction -related activities on the project site until the CDFW has been con sulted regarding the need to obtain an incidental take permit under the California Endangered Species Act. Impacts will be minimized through permitting with CDFW and will be fully mitigated in accordance with CDFW requirements.

Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned previously, the Project site has ornamental plants with some ruderal plant species scattered throughout. There are no riparian habitat s or sensitive natural communit ies identified at the site, nor are there any identified in local or regional plans. Therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect with respect to this threshold, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands as (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

No Impact. Based on the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the Project, no wetland features are known to exist at the Project site.

136
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

26 Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

No Impact. The Biological Resources Assessment did not identify the site as a regional or local wildlife movement corridors.6 Further, wildlife corridors typically serve as areas that wildlife traverse in order to migrate from one habitat to another and because the site is infill and surrounded by urban development, the site is unlikely to serve as any sort of wildlife corridor. Thus, no impact would occur.

Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project site does not indicate the presence of any sensitive habitat or wildlife features that would be significantly impacted. Although Policy 2.6 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the 2014 General Plan calls for the protection of biological resources, the BRA did not identify any such resources at the site due to its location and being surrounded by urban development. The Clovis Development Code does include tree removal permit requirements. However, developed single -family residential properties are exempt from the tree removal permit process . Consequently, due to the lack of any identified sensitive species, and because the Project is exempt from the tree protection ordinance, the impact would be less-than-significant.

Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

No Impact. The City and Fresno County currently do not have a regional Natural Community Conservation Plan or a Habitat Conservation Plan. The Project site is subject to relevant biological resource policies of the 2014 General Plan. Therefore, there are no impacts to conservation plans. Overall, no impact would occur.

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
X
b. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
X
c. Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
X

6 Biological Resources Assessment prepared by LSA, August 2022, page 5. 137
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
27 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located on a disturbed and developed site . The site has an existing single-family residence and is surrounded by existing residential development as well as a school. An Archaeological Resources Survey (ARS) was prepared by LSA dated August 22, 2022 (See Appendix C). The ARS was based on information obtained at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, C alifornia State University, Bakersfield, as well as review of other surveys conducted in the area. Based on the ARS, no cultural resources have been recorded within one-half mile of the Project Site.

DISCUSSION

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation . As previously mentioned, the Project site is developed with an existing residence. A cultural resource records search was conducted within one-half mile of the Project. The search indicated that the subject property had one previous cultural resources study that included a portion of the site. However, the ARS concluded that based on the results of the records search findings and lack of archeological resources previously identified within a one -half mile radius of the Project, the potential to encounter subsurface cultural resources is minimal. 7 Further, compliance with Policy 2.9 of the General Plan, which calls for the preservation of historical sites and buildings of state or national significance, would ensure that if there were historical resources present, they would be protected. Because there is the slight possibility for the accidental or inadvertent uncovering of archaeological resources during construction, Mitigation Measure CULT-1 would serve to reduce those potential impacts by requiring any work to stop until any found artifacts can be properly removed and inventoried by a qualified archaeologist. Therefore, regarding the Project causing a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource the Project would result in a less-than- significant impact with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If prehistoric or historic -era cultural or archaeological materials are encountered during construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall halt until a qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Inter ior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, can evaluate the significance of the find and make recommendations. Cultural resource materials may include prehistoric resources such as flaked and ground stone tools and debris, shell, bone, ceramics, and fire-affected rock as well as historic resources such as glass, metal, wood, brick, or structural remnants.

If the qualified professional archaeologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. These additional studies may include avoidance, testing, and evaluation or data recovery excavation.

If a potentially eligible resource is encountered, then the qualified professional archaeologist, the Lead Agency, and the project proponent shall arrange for either 1) total avoidance of the resource or 2) test excavations to evaluate eligibility and, if eligible, total data recovery. The determination shall be formally documented in writing and submitted to the Lead Agency as verification that the provisions for managing unanticipated discoveries have been met.

7 Archaeological Resources Survey Assessment by LSA, August 22, 2022, page 2. 138
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

28 Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. The site is developed with an existing residence and is surrounded by existing urban development. The site’s ground has been previously disturbed as a result of the agriculture, and residential uses and other ground disturbing activities throughout the years. Nevertheless, the potential remains that archeological resources could be inadvertently or accidentally uncovered during ground- disturbing activities such as trenching, digging, and the installation of utilities and other infrastructure.

Because there is the slight possibility for the accidental or inadvertent uncovering of archaeological resources during construction, Mitigation Measure CULT-1 would serve to reduce those potential impacts by requiring any work to stop until any found artifacts can be properly removed and inventoried by a qualified archaeologist.

Therefore, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact with mitigation.

Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. The site is developed with an existing residence and is surrounded by existing urban developed. The site’s ground has been previously disturbed as a result of the agriculture, and residential uses and other ground disturbing activities throughout the years. Nevertheless, the potential remains that human remains could be inadvertently or accidentally uncovered during ground-disturbing activities such as trenching, digging, and the installation of utilities and other infrastructure.

Because there is the slight possibility for the accidental or inadvertent uncovering of human remains during construction, Mitigation Measure CULT-2 would serve to reduce those potential impacts by requiring any work to stop until any found human remains can be properly removed by the County coroner and/or tribes. Therefore, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure CULT -2: If human remains are discovered during construction or operational activities, further excavation or disturbance shall be prohibited pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The specific protocol, guidelines, and channels of c ommunication outlined by the Native American Heritage Commission, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982, Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987), shall be followed. Section 7050.5(c) shall guide the potential Native American involvement, in the event of discovery of human remains, at the direction of the County coroner. All reports, correspondence, and determinations regarding the discovery of human remains on the project site shall be submitted to the Lead Agency.

6. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
139
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
29 b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located on an infill site surrounded by existing urban uses, primarily residential and educational.

DISCUSSION

Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project proposes the construction of a multifamily residential complex.

Construction of such structures would require site preparation, grading, paving, architectural coating, and trenching. Construction would consist of typical activities for construction projects and therefore would not require use of new resources. While such activities would consume petroleum-based fuels, such consumption would be temporary and conclude upon completion of construction. The proposed Proj ect in operation would be served by PG&E and would not require extensions of energy infrastructure or new energy supplies. As previously mentioned, the Project is located on an infill site surrounded by existing urban uses. Sources of operational energy consumption would include natural gas and/or electricity for space and water heating and transportation fuels (i.e., gasoline and diesel) for vehicle trips. Further, t he multifamily use would be subject to compliance with the latest energy efficiency standards in effect at the time of development and operation. This would include compliance with Title 24 Green Building Standards for energy efficiency, as well as be required to comply with the latest water efficient landscape policy regulations. Further, the Project would be required to comply with Clovis General Plan Policies 3.4 and 3.7 of the Open Space and Conservation, which call for the use of water conserving and drought tolerant landscape, as well as energy efficient buildings. Conformance to these standards would be reviewed during the City’s Multi-Family Design Review process and during review of building plans.

Consequently, compliance with these policies would ensure that the Project does not result in a significant impact due to the unnecessary consumption of energy and less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. See discussion under Section 6a above.

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
X
140
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

30 based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? X
iv. Landslides? X
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? X
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on - or off -site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
X
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater?
X
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or unique
geologic feature?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR identified no geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions known to exist on the Project site. Although Figure 5.6-2 of the Geology and Soils Chapter of the General Plan EIR does show a fault, the fault is located several miles east of the Project site.

DISCUSSION

Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?; ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?; iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?; iv) Landslides?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Although the Project site does not have any known faults on the site, the potential remains that seismic ground-shaking could occur from the fault located east of the Project. However, adherence to the most current California Building Codes would ensure that the structures are constructed safely and in compliance with the appropriate building codes. With regards to liquefaction, the 2014 General Plan EIR states that the soil types in the area are not considered conducive to liquefaction due to their high clay content 141
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
31 or from being too coarse.8 Further, the site is generally flat and therefore landslides would not occur at the Project site. Overall, due to the location away from a known fault, adherence to the most recent California Building Codes, and the flat topography, a less-than-significant impact would occur with regards to potential impacts from seismic activity.

Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The topography of the Project site is relatively flat with little to no slope.

Development of the site would require grading and construction activities to ensure a flat and graded surface prior to construction. Such activities may result in the soil erosi on and loss of topsoil. Such impacts would be addressed by applicable regulations set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board including preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer per the General Construction Permit requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The SWPPP incorporates Best Management Practices for erosion and sediment controls and soil stabilization. Furthe r, as part of the Project, grading plans are required to be submitted and approved by the Engineering Division to ensure appropriate grading of the site. Thus, these reviews and approval processes would ensure that a less- than-significant impact occur.

Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. See discussion under Section 7a.

Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating direct or indirect substantial risks to life or property?

No Impact. According to the 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, expansive soils are mostly present in areas along the northern edge of the non -Sphere of Influence (SOI) and the easternmost part of the Clovis non -SOI plan area. Because the Project is not within the vicinity of these areas, there would be no potential for creating direct or indirect substantial risks to life or property with regards to expansive soils. As a result, no impact would occur.

Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?

No Impact. The Project does not propose the use of septic tanks; therefore, no impact would occur.

Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. The Project site has been previously disturbed, as well as the immediately surrounding areas with no known occurrences of the discovery of paleontological resources. In addition, the BRA concluded that the potential for uncovering of subsurface deposits is unlikely. Nevertheless, the possibility remains that the inadvertent or accidental discovery could occur during ground disturbing construction activities. However, Mitigation Measure GEO -1, below, would serve to protect the accidental discovery of paleontological resources. As such, a less-than-significant with mitigation impact would occur.

8 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, Chapter 5: Geology and Soils, page 5.6-3. 142
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

32 Mitigation Measure GEO -1: If prehistoric or historic -era cultural materials are encountered during construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall halt until a qualified professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist, meeting the Secretary of the I nterior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, can evaluate the significance of the find and make recommendations. Cultural resource materials may include prehistoric resources such as fla ked and ground stone tools and debris, shell, bone, ceramics, and fire-affected rock as well as historic resources such as glass, metal, wood, brick, or structural remnants.

If the qualified professional determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. These additional studies may include avoi dance, testing, and evaluation or data recovery excavation.

If a potentially eligible resource is encountered, then the qualified professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist, the Lead Agency, and the project proponent shall arrange for either 1) total avoidance of the resource or 2) test excavations to evaluate eligibility and, if eligible, total data recovery. The determination shall be formally documented in writing and submitted to the Lead Agency as verification that the provisions for managing unanticipated discoveries have been met.

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
X
b. Conflict with any applicable plan,
policy or regulation of an agency
adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as greenhouse gases (GHGs) because they capture heat radiated from the sun as it is reflected into the atmosphere. The accumulation of GHG’s has been implicated as a driving force for global climate change. Definitions of climate change vary between and across regulatory authorities and the scientific community, but in general can be described a s the changing of the earth’s climate caused by natural fluctuations and anthropogenic activities which alte r the composition of the global atmosphere.

Individual projects contribute to the cumulative effects of climate change by emitting GHGs during construction and operational phases. The principal GHGs are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and water vapor. While the presence of the primary GHGs in t he atmosphere are naturally occurring, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) are largely emitted from human activities, accelerating the rate at which these compounds occur within earth’s atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is th e “reference gas” for climate change, meaning that emissions of GHGs are typically reported in “carbon dioxide -equivalent” measures.

Emissions of carbon dioxide are largely by -products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas methane results from 143
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
33 off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Other GHGs, with much greater heat-absorption potential than carbon dioxide, include hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride, and are generated in certain industrial processes.

There is international scientific consensus that human -caused increases in GHGs have and will continue to contribute to global warming, although there is uncertainty concerning the magnitude and rate of the warming.

Potential global warming impacts in Cal ifornia may include, but are not limited to, loss in snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years.

Secondary effects are likely to include a global rise in sea level, imp acts to agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in habitat and biodiversity.

In 2005, in recognition of California’s vulnerability to the effects of climate change, Executive Order S-3-05 was signed. The order sets forth a series of target dates by which statewide emission of GHG s would be progressively reduced, as follows: by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. In 2006, California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (A ssembly Bill 32), which requires the California Air Resources Board to design and implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020.

In December 2009, the SJVAPCD adopted guidance for addressing GHG impacts in its Guidance for Valley Land Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. The guidance relies on performance -based standards, otherwise known as Best Performance Standards (BPS), to assess significance of project -specific GHG emissions on global climate change during the environmental review process. Projects can reduce their GHG emission impacts to a less than significant level by implementing BPS.

Projects can also demonstrate compliance with the requirements of AB 32 by demonstrating that their emissions achieve a 29% reduction below “business as usual” (BAU) levels. BAU is a projected GHG emissions inventory assuming no change in existing business practices and without considering implementation of any GHG emission reduction measures.

Significance Criteria
The SJVAPCDs Guidance for Valley Land Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Impacts for New Projects Under CEQA provides initial screening criteria for climate change analyses, as well as draft guidance for the determination of significance.

The effects of project specific GHG emissions are cumulative, and therefore climate change impacts are addressed as a cumulative, rather than a direct, impact. The guidance for determining significance of impacts has been developed from the requirements of A ssembly Bill 32. The guideline addresses the potential cumulative impacts that a project’s GHG emissions could have on climate change.

Since climate change is a global phenomenon, no direct impact would be identified for an individual land development project. The following criteria are used to evaluate whether a project would result in a significant impact for climate change impacts:

• Does the project comply with an adopted statewide, regional, or local plan for reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions?
• Does the project achieve 29% GHG reductions by using approved Best Performance Standards? • Does the project achieve A ssembly Bill 32 targeted 29% GHG emission reductions compared with BAU?
144
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

34 Projects that meet one of these guidelines would have less -than-significant impact on the global climate. The goal of 29% below BAU for emissions of GHG has been used as a threshold of significance for this analysis.

DISCUSSION

Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would include the construction of a multifamily residential complex.

As such, GHG emissions would be produced through the construction and operational phases of the Project .

However, the SJVAPCD includes regulations to reduce GHG emissions such as standards for medium and heavy-duty engines and vehicles (i.e., tractors and construction equipment) that would apply to buildout of the Project. Compliance with Title 24 energy efficient building codes would apply, which also helps to reduce GHG emissions during the operation of the Project, by requiring minimum standards for insulation, energy efficiency, and window glazing, etc., which serve to maximize efficiency of new construc tion. Further, the Project would comply with the latest water efficient landscape standards , which help to reduce energy usage. Overall, the AQ/GHG Memo concluded that the Project, with implementation of required energy efficient standards, would sufficiently reduce emissions. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Based on the AQ/GHG Memo,9 the Project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emission reduction goals. As indicated in the discussion above under Section 8a, the Project would result in GHG reductions by complying with the latest energy efficient and water conservation standards. Consequently, the AQ/GHG Memo found this potential impact to be less-than- significant.

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
X
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
X

9 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum, LSA, page 24, October 13, 2023. 145
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
35 d. Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e. For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?
X
f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
g. Expose people or structures , either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
For purposes of this chapter, the term “hazardous materials” refers to both hazardous substances and hazardous wastes. A “hazardous material” is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as “substance or material that is capable of posing an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property when transported in commerce” (49 CFR 171.8). California Health and Safety Code Section 25501 defines a hazardous material as “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 a re not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material which 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 wastes” are defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 25141(b) as wastes that “…because of their quantity, concentration, or 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.”

The nearest school to the Project site is within the Reagan Education Center (REC), which is home to Reagan Elementary School and Clovis East High School. The REC is located across De Wolf Avenue.

DISCUSSION

Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project consists of the construction of a multifamily residential complex under the proposed R-3 zone district. The type of hazardous materials that would be associated with the Project are those typical of multifamily residential uses, such as the use of cleaners, landscape maintenance products, 146
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

36 soaps, and potential pesticides (for pest control). It is not expected that the Project would routinely transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials other than those typical of those associated with residential uses .

However, if transported, handled, and dispose d of in accordance with regulations, these materials are not generally considered of the type or quantity that would pose a significant hazard to the public when used as directed. During construction, typical equipment and materials would be use d that are associated with residential/commercial construction; however, any chemicals or materials would be handled, stored, disposed of, and/or transported according to applicable laws. Consequently, because the Project is not of the type of use that would routinely transport, use, or dispose of hazardo us materials a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project 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?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. See discussion above under Section 9a.

Would the project 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 Impact. As previously discussed, the Project site is near an education center that includes an elementary and high school. However, the Project is not of the type of use typically associated with emitting hazardous emissions or handling the type or quantity of hazardous materials such that it would pose a risk or threat to the school, or surrounding area. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project 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?

No Impact. According to the California Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor Database, the Project site is not located on or within the immediate vicinity of a hazardous materials site. 10 Therefore, no impact would occur.

For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?

No Impact. The Project is located approximately three (3) miles northeast of the Fresno Yosemite International Airport and is not within the Airport Influence Area, safety zones, noise, or airspace and overflight areas .

Therefore, no impact would occur.

Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project is located at a site that is surrounded by existing development.

Further, the road network is already in place from previous development. Although the Project could result in temporary traffic detouring or closures during buildout, these delays would be temporary and would be coordinated with the City Engineering Division and other divisions/departments to ensure safe access to and

10 California Department of Toxic Substance Control, EnviroS tor Database, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=71003467, accessed on July 13, 2023.
147
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
37 from the area is maintained. Further, the site itself would be reviewed by City departments to ensure adequate site access and circulation is provided in the event of an emergency. Overall, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Expose people or structures , either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The site is an infill site surrounded by urban uses. Therefore, it is not in a location typically associated with wildfires. Although urban fires could occur, the Project would be constructed to the latest fire code standards, which would include fire spr inklers in each unit, as well as the installation of fire hydrants throughout the site as required by the Clovis Fire Department. Further, other life safety features would be required such as smoke detectors, which would be reviewed and checked by the Fire Department to ensure proper operation prior to occupancy. Ultimately, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
X
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result
in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-
site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on - or offsite; (iii)
create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
X
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site? X
ii. Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite?
X
148
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

38 iii. Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing
or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
X
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City is within the drainages of three streams: Dry Creek, Dog Creek, and Redbank Slough. On the north, Dry Creek discharges into the Herndon Canal in the City of Fresno west of Clovis. South of Dry Creek, Dog Creek is a tributary of Redbank Slough, which discharges into Mill Ditch south of Clovis (USGS 2012). A network of storm drains in the City discharge into 31 retention basins, most of which provide drainage for a one- to two- square-mile area. Most of the Plan Area east and northeast of the City is not in dr ainage areas served by retention basins.

The Project is located within the FMFCD boundary, and subject to its standards and regulations. Detention and retention basins in the FMFCD’s flood control system are sized to accommodate stormwater from each basin’s drainage area in built out condition. The current capacity standard for FMFCD basins is to contain runoff from six inches of rainfall during a 10-day period and to infiltrate about 75 to 80 percent of annual rainfall into the groundwater basin (Rourke 2014). Basins are highly effective at redu cing average concentrations of a broad range of contaminants, including several polyaromatic hydrocarbons, total suspended solids, and most metals (FMFCD 2013). Pollutants are removed by filtration through soil, and thus do not reach the groundwater aquifer (FMFCD 2014). Basins are built to design criteria exceeding statewide Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) standards (FMFCD 2013). The urban flood control system provides treatment for all types of development—not just the specific categorie s of development defined in a SUSMP —thus providing greater water quality protection for surface water and groundwater than does a SUSMP.

In addition to their flood control and water quality functions, many FMFCD basins are used for groundwater recharge with imported surface water during the dry season through contracts with the FID and the cities of Fresno and Clovis (FMFCD 2013).

The pipeline collection system in the urban flood control system is designed to convey the peak flow rate from a two-year storm.

Most drainage areas in the urban flood control system do not discharge to other water bodies and drain mostly through infiltration into groundwater. When necessary, FMFCD can move water from a basin in one such drainage area to a second such basin by pumping water into a street and letting water flow in curb and gutter to a storm drain inlet in an ad joining drainage area (Rourke 2014). Two FMFCD drainage areas discharge directly to the San Joaquin River, and three to an irrigation canal, without storage in a basin. Six drainage areas containing basins discharge to the San Joaquin River, and another 39 basins discharge to canals (FMFCD 2013).

149
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
39 A proposed development that would construct more impervious area on its project site than the affected detention/retention basin is sized to accommodate is required to infiltrate some stormwater onsite, such as through an onsite detention basin or drainage swales (Rourke 2014).

Groundwater
In 2014, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law which created the framework for groundwater management within California. As a result, SGMA requires governments and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt gr oundwater overdraft and bring the groundwater basins back to a balance.

The City of Clovis is within the Kings Groundwater Subbasin, which is managed by the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the area which the City is located and is considered critically over drafted. The Kings Basin is a sub basin to the southern part of the San Joaquin Valley Basin and covers 1,530 square miles.

Groundwater within the basin is monitored by the City, FID, and the Kings River Conservation District.

The City of Clovis provides water through a combination of surface and groundwater sources, including the Kings River, as well as several City-managed wells.

Lastly, a Water Infrastructure Investigation (WII) was completed by Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P) on September 1, 2023. The investigation was into the water system infrastructure required to serve the proposed development. Information from this investigation is used for the analysis in the Hydrology and Water Quality and Utilities and Service Systems sections of this Initial Study.

DISCUSSION

Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project is located on a site that was previously anticipated for suburban development that the Project proposes. As with any development, existing policies and standards are required to be complied with, which are assessed during review of the entitlements. As such, the engineering department, as well as outside agencies such as the FMFCD review all plans to ensure that none of the water quality standards are violated and that waste discharge requirements are adhered to during construction and operation of the Project. Consequently, this process of Project review and approval would ensure that a less-than- significant impact occur.

Would the project substantially de crease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level due to the Project. The General Plan EIR identified a net decrease in groundwater aquifer throughout the region, however, because the City’s domestic water system is primarily served through surface water via existing water entitlements, the loss of aquifer is less than significant.

The City has developed a surface water treatment plant that reduces the need for pumped groundwater and has also expanded the municipal groundwater recharge facility. In addition, all landscaping shall be subject to Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements, which mandate drought tolerant and low water use landscaping. Further, the WII for the Project determined that the existing and planned water distribution system 150
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

40 and recommended connections should be adequate to convey water supply to the Project to support anticipated demands from the Project. For these reasons, the Project’s impacts to groundwater are less-than-significant.

Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or offsite; (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capac ity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substan tial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project site is located on an infill site that is generally flat and surrounded by existing urban uses. There are no streams or rivers on the site that would be altered as a result of the Project.

The infrastructure surrounding the site, such as storm drains are already in place from existing development.

The drainage pattern would be constructed per existing policies and regulations through review of the plans by the City engineering department and the FMFCD to ensure the site is properly and adequately drained such that the storm drain system is maintained and so that no flooding occurs. The review and approval by City engineers and FMFCD would mean that the Project results in a less-than-significant impact.

Would the project, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?

No Impact. The Project site is located on an infill site substantially surrounded by existing urban uses. Due to the Central Valley’s location away from the ocean, an impact from a tsunami is unlikely. The Project site is not in a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zone. The nearest FEMA flood zone is over 1,400 feet to the east of the site. Consequently, this is a low-risk area and as a result a no impact would occur.

Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The City of Clovis is within the North Kings County Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). Pursuant to the SGMA, certain regions in California are required to develop and implement a groundwater management plan that sustainably manages groundwater resources. The North Kings County GSA adopted a groundwater management plan in 2019. The Project will have access to the annual allotment of water. With regards to water quality control, the Project would be required to adhere to appropriate storm drain conveyance and the protection of water resources which would include the installation of backflow preventers.

Further, the WII for the Project determined that the existing and planned water distribution system and recommended connections should be adequate to convey water supply to the Project to support anticipated demands from the Project. Consequently, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact.

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an existing
community?
X
b. Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted

151
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
41 for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As described above in the Project Description, the Project site is considered an in-fill site in that the surrounding areas are urbanized. There are existing single-family residential uses to the north, west, and south, as well as a school to the east.

DISCUSSION

Would the project physically divide an existing community?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The site is developed and is within a general area that is urbanized with a mix of existing uses and land use types. Typically, physically dividing existing communities is associated with the construction of a new road intersecting an established area or introducing uses that are not necessarily in line with the existing uses and planned land uses of the area. The Project site is adjacent to Ashlan Avenue and between a school site and existing single-family residences. As a residential use, the Project is in line with the surrounding area. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project 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?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The proposed use requires the amendment to the City’s General Plan Land Use Diagram from the existing Low Density Residential designation to High Density Residential. The proposed rezone request to the R-3 zone district is consistent with the proposed High Density Residential designation.

Further, through t he entitlement process, the Project is reviewed for compliance with applicable regulations, including those intended for avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. For e xample, the Project would be required to comply with applicable lighting, landscape, and noise standards, which are regulated through the Clovis Municipal Code to ensure minimal impacts to the environment as well as with neighboring properties.

Overall, with the review process ensuring General Plan and other applicable policies will be adhered to, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact with regards to conflicting with a land use plan.

12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?

X
b. Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?

152
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

42 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of Clovis 2014 General Plan EIR defines minerals as any naturally occurring chemical elements or compounds formed from inorganic processes and organic substances.11 The 2014 General Plan EIR indicates that there are no active mines or inactive mines within the Plan Area of the City of Clovis.

DISCUSSION

Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

No Impact. As stated above, the City of Clovis does not have any active mines or inactive mines. Further, the Project site is an infill site within the City and is not zoned, designated, or otherwise mapped for mineral resource extraction, or for having mineral resources of value to the region present on or below the surface of the site.

Therefore, no impact would occur.

Would the project r esult in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

No Impact. See discussion under Section 12a.

13. NOISE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in excess
of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? X
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As mentioned above in the Project Description, the site is located on the northwest corner of Ashlan and De Wolf Avenues. In general, the Project site is within an urbanized area of the City surrounded by existing residential to the north, west, and south, as well as a school to the east. As such, existing ambient noise levels are typical of noises from these types of developments (i.e., schools, roadway networks, and residential).

11 2014 Clovis General Plan EIR, Chapter 5: Mineral Resources, page 5.11-1. 153
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
43 DISCUSSION

Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would include the redevelopment of a site within Clovis. The Project would result in a temporary and permanent increase in ambient noise levels as a result. However, as mentioned above, the Project site is infill and is already surrounded by existing residential development and school uses. Therefore, while the Project would introduce new ambient noise from the constr uction of the multifamily complex, it is likely that the Project would still meet City noise standards.

Further, CMC Section 9.22.080, Noise, sets forth noise standards for development which would need to be complied with. For example, construction would only be permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends. However, between June 1st and September 15th, construction may begin at 6 a.m. on weekdays.

Consequently, because the Project site is considered infill, already surrounded by similar uses, and because construction noise would be temporary in nature, the potential for a substantial increase in ambient or temporary noise increases is considered less-than-significant.

Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would include the redevelopment of a site within Clovis.

Construction equipment typical of the development of multifamily residential buildings would be utilized temporarily. This equipment could include the use of heavy tractors, trucks, and other equipment; however, this type of equipment isn’t typically associated with excessive groundborne vibration given the distance of residential homes to the site. If any vibration were to occur, it’s likely that it would be temporary in nature and not at levels that would significantly impact the surrounding area.

Further, the Project would be required to comply with the provisions of Section 9.22. 100 of the CMC, which requires that vibration not be perceptible along property lines and that it shall not interfere with operations or facilities on adjoining parcels. It’s important to note that temporary construction vibration and noise is exempt from these provisions since construction is temporary. Overall, because the type of equipment likely to be used in the development of the Project is not considered to be of the type and intensity to result in substantial vibration or groundborne noise, the impact would be less-than-significant.

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 is not located within the vicinity of Fresno Yosemite International Airport, whic h is approximately three (3) miles southwest of the site. As such, it is located outside of the noise contour map of the airport.12 Therefore, there would be no exposure to excessive noise levels and no impact would occur.

12 Fresno Council of Governments, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, December 2018, Fresno Yosemite International Airport, Exh ibit D2, Noise Contours.
154
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

44 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located on an in -fill site that is planned for residential use in the 2014 Clovis General Plan. As previously mentioned, a general plan amendment and rezone ha ve been filed to redesignate the site to High Density Residential and rezone the site to R-3 to allow for the proposed multifamily project.

DISCUSSION

Would the project i nduce 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)?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned, the Project would include the development of a multifamily complex with 26 units. The proposed density from the Low Density Residential designation to the High Density Residential designation will increase the capacity of housing units and thus will increase the number of people in the area. The existing designation will allow for six residences while the proposed project will provide 26 units.

While the Project includes increasing the density for residential use, the overall area was planned for development and is considered an infill site. Further, unplanned population growth is typically associated with providing new services in remote areas of the City or other infrastructure th at was not previously identified in the General Plan. The Project site itself is an in -fill site, thus, the primary infrastructure (i.e., road network, utilities, etc.) is already in place and would be able to serve the site. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project d isplace s ubstantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project site is developed with one single family residence that is currently occupied. While there is an existing occupied home on the site, the Project is not displacing a substantial number of people. Therefore, the Project would not result in the substantial displacement of existing people or housing and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
155
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
45 15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the Project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to ma intain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:

a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks? X
e. Other public facilities? X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located on an in-fill site within the City, surrounded by existing residential and school uses. The Project would be served by the Clovis Fire Department, Clovis Police Department, with mutual aid from the City of Fresno or County of Fresno, when needed. The Project site would also be within the Clovis Unified School District.

The nearest fire station is Clovis Fire Station 6 , located approximately a mile northeast of the site and Clovis Fire Station 4, located approximately two (2) miles northwest of the site. The Clovis Police department is located approximately four and a half (4.5) miles north of the site.

DISCUSSION

Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significa nt environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Although the Project would result in additional residential units to the area, the site is in an urbanized area of the City already able to be served by the Clovis Fire Department. Also, the site itself is near Fire Station 6, which would mean that response times should be able to be maintained during calls for service. As part of the entitlement process for the Project, the Clovis Fire Department will review the design and site layout to ensure adequate fire safety measures and site circulation are achieved. This include s placement of new fire hydrants throughout the site, adequate drive widths for fire truck and emergency vehicle access, and the appropriate application of fire codes, such as installation of sprinkler systems, fire alarms, and smoke detectors. The initial review by the Fire Department determined that adequate fire services can be provided to the site subject to standard conditions of approval, including providing minimum clear paths of travel for fire access. Overall, construction that would meet the latest fire code standards, and review by the Clovis Fire Department, impacts rela ted to effects on the performance of the Fire Department would be less-than- significant impact.

156
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

46 Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significa nt environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Although the Project would result in additional residential units to the area, the site is in an urbanized area of the City already able to be served by the Clovis Police Department. The Clovis Police Department headquarters are located at 1233 Fifth Street, which is approximately four and a half (4.5) miles from the site. As part of the entitlement process for the Project, the Clovis Police Department will review the design and site layout to ensure adequate safety measures ar e achieved. Lastly, the site is in an already urbanized area serviced by the Clovis Police Department, and thus access to and from the site would be similar to existing conditions when responding to calls for services. Consequently, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Less-Than Significant Impact. The Project includes construction of a multifamily residential complex which would generate students for schools. The Project request was distributed to the Clovis Unified School District for review and the school district did not express any concerns accommodating additional students that may result from the development of this project. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Less-Than-Significant Impact. See discussion under Section 16, Recreation for the analysis related to parks.

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Although the Project would result in an increase in residential density, the increase can be considered less than significant. The project site is an infill development surrounded by existing residential and school uses. Further, through the entitlement process, the Project would undergo review by several departments and agencies for compliance with appropriate regulations and policies. This could result in various impact fees that are intended to maintain and enhance public facilities as appropriate. As such, payment of the typical development fees, as well as project review by the different department and agencies, would result in the Project having a less-than-significant impact to public facilities.

16. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
157
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
47 a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
X
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located o n an in -fill site surrounded by existing residential and school uses. There are seven parks within half a mile of the subject property. The Arrowhead and East West Parks, located northwest of the site, are the closest public parks. There is also a proposed paseo that the project will ultimately connect to once further development of adjacent parcels occurs.

DISCUSSION

Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned in the Population and Housing section of th is Initial Study, the Project proposes the construction of a multifamily residential complex which will generate new residents to the site that may increase utilization of the nearby park. However, the additional 26 units is not likely to substantially increase the usage of the park s. Further, the Project itself would include landscaped common areas and play areas within its site for its residents. Overall, the type and use of Project would not likely increase the use of existing parks such that physical deterioration would occur. Therefore, the impact would be less-than- significant.

Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project site itself would construct on site landscaping in compliance with City standards for residential development. However, it is not likely that the Project itself would require the construction or expansion of new recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The Project would also be required to contribute a proportionate sha re towards the acquisition and development of future parks in order for the City to maintain its adopted ratio of providing four (4) acres of park land per 1,000 residents, as stated in Policy 1.1 in the Open Space and Conservation Element of the 2014 General Plan, and Section 3.4.03 of the CMC. As such, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
X
158
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

48 roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities?
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
X
c. Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d. Result in inadequate emergency
access? X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is an infill site surrounded by existing residences and a school. The site is bounded by Ashlan Avenue on the south and De Wolf Avenue on the east . According to the 2014 Clovis General Plan Circulation Diagram in the Circulation Element (Figure C-1), Ashlan Avenue is designated as an arterial street and De Wolf Avenue is designated as a collector street. Arterial streets are designed to move large volumes of traffic and are intended to provide high level of mobility between freeways, expressways, other a rterials, and collector roadways. Arterial streets typically have more right-of-way and a higher degree of access control than collector roadways. Collector streets provide for relatively short distance travel between and within neighborhoods.

Collectors are not designed to handle long-distance through-traffic. Driveway access to collectors is less limited than on arterials. Speed limits on these stree ts are typically lower than those found on arterials. A Trip Generation Analysis (TGA) and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis (VMT Analysis) was prepared by LSA dated August 22, 2022 (included as Appendix E of this Initial Study). The information and analysi s in the following section is based on the results of the TGA and VMT Analysis.

DISCUSSION

Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As mentioned above, the site is within an urbanized area that was previously planned for residential development by the 2014 Clovis General Plan. The Project proposes a density of approximately 16.04 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable density range of the High Density Residential land use designation. Although the existing land use designation is Low Density Residential, the applicant requests an increase to the High Density Residential land use designation.

As a result of the proposed increase, preparation of a TGA was required by the City Engineer to evaluate the potential difference in traffic generation of the proposed Project and that which could otherwise be developed consistent with the Clovis General Plan. The Project is estimated to generate 175 daily trips, 11 AM peak hour trips and 13 PM peak hour trips. Based on this analysis, the City Engineer determined that there are less-than- significant impacts to the program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Under Senate Bill (SB) 743, traffic impacts are related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT metric became mandatory on July 1, 2020. The City Guidelines provide guidance relative to analyzing VMT for purposes of determining transportation impacts in accordance with the CEQA. The 159
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
49 City Guidelines also state that Projects that generate or attract fewer than 500 vehicle trips per day are presumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. These Projects are identified as small projects.

The Project is considered a small project and therefore will cause a less-than-significant impact.

Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would result in a significant impact if it would include features that would create a hazard such as a sharp curve in a new roadway or create a blind corner or result in sight distance issues from entryways. Through the entitlement process, the Project would undergo review by multiple City departments, such as planning and engineering, to ensure that the site layout conforms to existing regulations, such as the City Development Code, and other applicable codes, such as the fire code and building code. During this review, the Project would need to make the necessary corrections to ensure that no hazardous design features would result from the Project. Therefore, because the Project would undergo site plan and design review to ensure consistency and adherence to applicable design and site layout guidelines, a less-than- significant impact would occur.

Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would include two ingress/egress access points, one along Ashlan Avenue and one along De Wolf Avenue. As part of the Project review, the Clovis Fire Department would review all plans to ensure adequate emergency access is provided. This review includes review for adequate roadway widths, turning radii, as well as adequate access to units and accessibility to water. Consequently, because the Project plans would be required by the CMC to be reviewed and approved by Clovis Fire Department and Police Department prior to construction, this impact would be less-than-significant.

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k)?
X
b. A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Section
5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph,
the lead agency shall consi der the
significance of the resource to a California
Native American Tribe?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
On September 25, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill (AB) 52, which intends to protect a new class of resources under the CEQA. This new class is Tribal Cultural Resources and provides an avenue to 160
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

50 identify tribal cultural resources through a consultation process, similar to SB 18. However, unlike SB 18 where consultation is required for all General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, AB 52 applies to all projects where a Notice of Determination is filed, and the City has received written notification requests. Furthermore, the consultation process is required to be complete prior to filing a Notice of Intent.

On June 7, 2023 and June 12, 2023, consistent with SB 18 and AB 52, invitations to consult on the Project were mailed to 14 tribes within the area. Tribes have up to thirty (30) days to request consultation in accordance with AB 52, while tribes have up to (90) days to request consultation in accordance with SB 18. No requests for consultation were requested during these times.

A Historical Resources Evaluation (HRE) was prepared by LSA dated August 23, 2022 (See Appendix F). The HRE was based off the Department of Parks and Recreation forms and was evaluated under the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Places. It was determined that the existing residence does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register under any criteria.

An ARS was prepared by LSA dated August 22, 2022 (See Appendix C). The ARS was based on information obtained at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, CSU Bakersfield, as well as review of other surveys conducted in the area. Based on the ARS, no cultural resources have been identified within a half mile of the Project site.

DISCUSSION

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change to a listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?

No Impact. As mentioned in the Project Description, the Project site is currently developed. There are no existing structures or features on the site that are listed or eligible in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register. As such, the Project would have no impact.

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change to a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe?

Less-Than-Significant Impact With Mitigation. As mentioned above, the City invited 1 4 Native American tribes to consult on the Project under AB 52 and SB 18, and no tribes requested consultation within the 30-day or 90-day period. The Project site is developed but would require trenching and ground -disturbing activities during construction for the installation of utility infrastructure needed to serve the Project. Although no cultural resources were identified at the site, the potential remains that cultural resources could be inadvertently discovered during ground -disturbing activities. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR -1 and TCR-2 below would reduce potential significant impacts and ensure protection in the event of accidental discovery of any cultural resources. With Mitigation Measure TCR-1 and TCR-2, impacts would be less-than- significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1: If cultural or archaeological materials are encountered during construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall halt until a qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, can evaluate the significance of the find and make recommendations. Cultural resource materials may include prehistoric resources such as flaked and ground stone tools and debris, 161
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
51 shell, bone, ceramics, and fire -affected rock as well as historic resources such as glass, metal, wood, brick, or structural remnants.

If the qualified professional archaeologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. These additional studies may include avoidance, testing, and evaluation or data recovery excavation.

If a potentially eligible resource is encountered, then the qualified professional archaeologist, the Lead Agency, and the project proponent shall arrange for either 1) total avoidance of the resource or 2) test excavations to evaluate eligibility and, if eligible, total data recovery. The determination shall be formally documented in writing and submitted to the Lead Agency as verification that the provisions for managing unanticipated discoveries have been met.

Mitigation Measure TCR-2: If human remains are discovered during construction or operational activities, further excavation or disturbance shall be prohibited pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The specific protocol, guidelines, and channels of c ommunication outlined by the Native American Heritage Commission, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982, Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987), shall be followed. Section 7050.5(c) shall guide the potential Native American involvement, in the event of discovery of human remains, at the direction of the County coroner. All reports, correspondence, and determinations regarding the discovery of human remains on the project site shall be submitted to the Lead Agency.

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
X
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
X
162
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

52 e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The electricity and natural gas services in the City of Clovis are provided by PG&E . AT&T/SBC provides telephone service to the City.

The City’s water supply sources include groundwater drawn from the Kings Sub-basin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin and surface water from the FID. Surface water is treated at the City of Clovis Surface Water Treatment Facility.

The City of Clovis provides sewer collection service to its residents and businesses. Treatment of wastewater occurs at the Fresno -Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (RWTP). The Fresno -Clovis RWTP is operated and maintained by the City of Fresno a nd operates under a waste discharge requirement issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Additionally, the City has completed a 2.8 mgd wastewater treatment/water reuse facility, which will service the City’s new growth areas.

The FMFCD has the responsibility for storm water management within the Fresno -Clovis metropolitan area of the Project site. Stormwater runoff that is generated by land development is controlled through a system of pipelines and storm drainage detention basins.

DISCUSSION

Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project includes construction of a multifamily infill development. A WII for the Project was conducted by P&P and a Wastewater Service Study (WSS) for the Project was conducted by Blair, Church & Flynn Consulting Engineers dated September 1, 2023 and amended by the City on October 27, 2023. In the WII, P&P confirmed that the City’s existing and planned water distribution system and recommended connections should be adequate to convey water supply to the Project to support the anticipated demands form the Project. The WSS also indicates that the existing and planned wastewater collection system facilities can accommodate the proposed change from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential land use for the subject site. Further, a s part of the review process for the Project, the wastewater impacts will be evaluated by the City Engineer to ensure compliance with the City’s Wastewater Master Plan , as well as FMFCD, so that the Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements such that a new facility would be required, nor would the existing treatment facility need to be expanded. Further, while the Project would introduce new uses at this site, the type of development is consistent with the land use designation previously planned for. Upon review and approval by the City Engineer, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact.

Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project is entirely within the FID service area. Lands within the service area are entitled to an average annual allotment of approximately 2.24 acre-feet per acre (AF/ac). According to the WII conducted by P&P, the Project would increase the Annual Average (AFY) from 4.1 to 7.6. The additional supply required (AFY) is 4.0 for the Project. In accordance with City Ordinance, the Project will need to pay 163
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
53 additional fees so that the City can acquire additional water supply to serve the development. Water from the Kings River is available to offset the anticipated annual demand of 7.6 acre-feet. Therefore, the Project will cause a less-than-significant impact on water supply.

Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The WSS determined that the existing and planned wastewater collection system facilities can accommodate the type of use proposed. For that reason, the impact would be less-than- significant.

Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project would introduce new solid waste throughout construction and operation of the Project. However, the Project would be required to comply with Chapter 6.3.1, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Debris, of the CMC during construction. This section of the CMC requires that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of waste tonnage from a project be diverted from disposal, and that all new residential (and commercial) construction within the City shall submit an d obtain approval for a waste management plan prior to construction activities. Compliance with these measures would ensure that the Project does not result in a significant impact during the construction phase of the Project. Further, compliance with policies in the General Plan for the reduction and recycling of solid waste would serve to reduce impacts of solid waste by promoting and encouraging the recycling of materials. Lastly, according to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the City has exceeded their target population disposal rate of 4.7 pounds per day per person, meaning that Clovis residents are actually producing less solid waste than the target set by the State.13 Consequently, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Less-Than-Significant. See discussion 19d above.

20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
X

13 CalRecycle, City of Clovis, https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DiversionProgram/JurisdictionDiversionPost2006, accessed November 2023. 164
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

54 power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located on an infill site surrounded by existing urban uses. The site’s topography is relatively flat with level terrain with an existing single-family residence.

DISCUSSION

Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project is located at a site that is relatively flat with level terrain and is surrounded by existing development. Further, the road network is already in place from previous development.

Although the Project could result in temporary traffic detouring or closures during buildout, these delays would be temporary and would be coordin ated with the City Engineering staff and other departments to ensure safe access to and from the area is maintained. Further, the site itself wo uld be reviewed by City departments to ensure adequate site access and circulation is provided in the event of an emergency. Overall, a less-than- significant impact would occur.

Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project site is relatively flat with level terrain, is partially developed, and is located on an infill site surrounded by existing urban uses. The general vicinity of the site is flat, therefore, is not of the type of topography nor in a location likely to exacerbate wildfire risks. Further, the Project would be required to comply with the late st fire codes and would be required to include spr inklers on the interior of the structures and require installation of several hydrants throughout the site. Lastly, the site plans would undergo review by the Clovis Fire Department to ensure that all fire safety regulations are met. Therefore, a less-than- significant impact would occur.

Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The site is located in an area currently developed. As a new development, installation of a private roadway network, water lines, and power lines would be required; however, these utilities and infrastructure are typical of development and would be constructed to standards of the respective agencies and departments which oversee them, as well as be required to comply all necessary plan review and permitting requirements of such departments and agencies. As such, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

165
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
55 Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The City of Clovis has generally flat topography, and the site itself is in an area that is not in close proximity to hillsides that would expose people or structures to significant risks associates with downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff or post -fire slope instability. As such, a less-than- significant impact would occur.

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially
reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?

X
b. Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?

X
c. Does the project have environmental
effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Project is located on an infill site within the City of Clovis, substantially surrounded by existing development consisting of residential and educational uses.

DISCUSSION

Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

166
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS

56 Less-Than-Significant Impact. As discussed throughout the Initial Study, the Project would not result in any significant impacts with implementation of mitigation measures prescribed above. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact as it would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment.

Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. The Project includes mitigation measures in certain topic areas identified throughout this Initial Study which would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. None of these impacts would be cumulatively considerable since most are either temporary impacts from construction or site specific. While air quality that is generally considered to be cumulatively measured, the Project was found to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance with existing regulations from the SJVPACD. As such, future Projects in the City would be required to comply with those same regulations, ensuring adequate mitigation as development occurs. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Less-Than-Significant Impact. As discussed throughout the Initial Study, the Project would not result in a significant impact that could not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

167
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

GPA2023-002 & R2023-002

INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CLOVIS
57 I. Report Preparation

LEAD AGENCY

McKencie Perez, MPA
Senior Planner
City of Clovis
Planning & Development Services

TECHNICAL STUDIES

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum
De Wolf Apartments Project
Amy Fischer, Principal
Cara Cunningham, Associate
LSA Associates, Inc.

Biological Resources Assessment
De Wolf Apartments Project
Kelly McDonald, Biologist
LSA Associates, Inc.

Archaeological Resources Survey Assessment
De Wolf Apartments Project
Kerrie Collison, M.A, Registered Professional Archaeologist, Associate/Senior Cultural Resources Manager LSA Associates, Inc.

Water Infrastructure Investigation
De Wolf Apartments Project
Nicolas Jacobson, PE
Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group

Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Memorandum De Wolf Apartments Project
Ambarish Mukherjee, Principal
LSA Associates, Inc.

Historical Resources Evaluation
De Wolf Apartments Project
Casey Tibbet, M.A., Associate/Cultural Resources Manager/Architectural Historian LSA Associates, Inc.

Wastewater Service Study
De Wolf Apartments Project
Brad Kerner, PE
Blair, Church & Flynn Consulting Engineers

168
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
2565 Alluvial Avenue, Suite 172, Clovis, California 93611 559.490.1210 www.lsa.net

MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 13, 2023
TO: Peter Sumal
FROM: Amy Fischer, Principal
Cara Cunningham, Associate
SUBJECT: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum for the DeWolf Apartments Project

INTRODUCTION
This Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis for the proposed DeWolf Apartments Project (project) in Fresno County has been prepared using methods and assumptions recommended in the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI).1 This analysis includes a description of existing regulatory framework, an assessment of project construction and operation period emissions, and an assessment of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The 1.62-acre project site is located at 3182 DeWolf Avenue, northwest of the intersection of DeWolf Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, in Clovis, California. The project site would be accessible via Ashlan Avenue to the south and DeWolf Avenue to the east. The project site is bound to the north by single-family residential uses, to the east by DeWolf Avenue, to the south by Ashlan Avenue, and to the west by single-family residential uses. The project site is currently developed with an approximately 1,743-square-foot single-family residence.

The proposed project would include 26 multifamily apartment units and 26 parking stalls that would be covered with solar panels. The project would also include low maintenance landscape features.

Once operational, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 175 net new average daily trips.2

1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. March 19. Website: www.valleyair.org/transportation/ceqa_idx.htm (accessed July 2022). 2 LSA. 2022. 3182 De Wolf Avenue Apartments Project Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Memorandum.

Appendix A
169
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 2 Construction of the proposed project is expected to begin in January 2023. The proposed project would not require any soil import or export but would include the demolition of the existing residence.

Existing Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Area
For the purposes of this analysis, sensitive receptors are areas of population that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants. Sensitive receptor locations include residences, schools, day-care centers, hospitals, parks, and similar uses that are sensitive to air quality. Impacts on sensitive receptors are of particular concern because they are the population most vulnerable to the effects of air pollution.1 The closest sensitive receptors to the project site include single-family residences located immediately north and west of the project site boundary, as well as a school located to the east of the proposed project site.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Air Quality Background
Air quality is primarily a function of both local climate and local sources of air pollution and regional pollution transport. The amount of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the amount of the pollutant released and the atmosphere’s ability to transport and dilute the pollutant.

The major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, and terrain, and for photochemical pollutants, sunshine.

A region’s topographic features have a direct correlation with air pollution flow and, therefore, are used to determine the boundary of air basins. The proposed project is located in Fresno County, within the jurisdiction of the SJVAPCD, which regulates air quality in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB).

The SJVAB is comprised of approximately 25,000 square miles and covers all of seven counties including Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare, and the western portion of an eighth, Kern. The SJVAB is defined by the Sierra Nevada mountains in the east (8,000 to 14,000 feet in elevation), the Coast Ranges in the west (averaging 3,000 feet in elevation), and the Tehachapi mountains in the south (6,000 to 8,000 feet in elevation). The valley is topographically flat with a slight downward gradient to the northwest. The valley opens to the sea at the Carquinez Straits where the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay. An aerial view of the SJVAB would simulate a “bowl” opening only to the north. These topographic features restrict air movement through and out of the basin.

Both the State of California (State) and the federal government have established health-based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O
3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter (PM2.5

1 SJVAPCD. 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI). March. Website:
http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf (accessed July 2022). 170
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 3 and PM10). The SJVAB is designated as nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5 for federal standards and nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for State standards.

Air quality monitoring stations are located throughout the nation and maintained by the local air districts and State air quality regulating agencies. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to identify regions as “attainment” or “nonattainment” depending on whether the regions meet the requirements stated in the applicable National Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Nonattainment areas are imposed with additional restrictions as required by the USEPA. In addition, different classifications of attainment, such as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme, are used to classify each air basin in the State on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. The classifications are used as a foundation to create air quality management strategies to improve air quality and comply with the NAAQS. The SJVAB attainment statuses for each of the criteria pollutants for Fresno County are listed in Table A.

Table A: SJVAB Air Quality Attainment Status for Fresno County Pollutant State Federal
Ozone (1-hour) Severe/Nonattainment Standard Revoked
Ozone (8-hour) Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment (Maintenance)
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Lead Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Unclassified
Sulfates Attainment No Federal Regulation
Hydrogen Sulfide Unclassified No Federal Regulation
Source: California Air Resources Board (2016) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (2016).

PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size

Ozone levels, as measured by peak concentrations and the number of days over the State 1-hour standard, have declined substantially as a result of aggressive programs by the SJVAPCD and other regional, State, and federal agencies. The reduction of peak concentrations represents progress in improving public health; however, the SJVAB still exceeds the State standard for 1-hour and 8-hour ozone levels. In addition, the SJVAB was designated as a serious nonattainment area for the federal 1997 8-hour ozone level in June 2004. The USEPA lowered the national 8-hour ozone standard from

0.80 to 0.75 parts per million (ppm) on May 27, 2008. The San Joaquin Valley is classified nonattainment for the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards at the State and federal level, although a request for redesignation as attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard was submitted to the USEPA in 2014.
171
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 4 During the 2019 to 2021 time period, the monitoring station of 908 N. Villa Avenue located in Clovis (the closest monitoring station to the project site) recorded the following exceedances of the State and federal 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards:1
• 27 exceedances of the federal 8-hour ozone standard in 2019, 36 in 2020, and 34 in 2021 • 30 exceedances of the State 8-hour ozone standard in 2019, 41 in 2020, and no data in 2021 • No exceedances of the federal 1-hour ozone standard in 2019, 2 in 2020, and 0 in 2021 • 6 exceedances of the State 1-hour ozone standard in 2019, 12 in 2020, and no data in 2021 National and State standards have also been established for PM2.5 over 24-hour and yearly averaging periods. PM2.5, because of the small size of individual particles, can be especially harmful to human health. PM2.5 is emitted by common combustion sources such as cars, trucks, buses, and power plants, in addition to ground-disturbing activities. The SJVAB is considered a nonattainment area for the PM2.5 standard at the State and federal levels. The following PM2.5 exceedances were recorded at the Clovis air monitoring station:
• 1 exceedance of the federal 24-hour PM2.5 standard in 2019, 40 in 2020, and 0 in 2021 The SJVAB is classified as a PM10 nonattainment area at the State level and was redesignated from serious nonattainment to attainment of the federal PM10 standard in 2008. Because the SJVAB was redesignated from nonattainment to attainment, a PM10 maintenance plan was adopted in 2007 and is required to be updated every 10 years. The following PM10 exceedances were recorded at the Clovis air monitoring station:
• The federal 24-hour PM10 standard had no exceedances in 2019 and only one exceedance in both 2020 and 2021.
• 11 exceedances of the State 24-hour PM10 standard in 2019, 114 in 2020, and no data for 2021.

No exceedances of the State or federal CO standards have been recorded at any of the region’s monitoring stations since 1991. The SJVAB is currently considered an attainment area for State and federal 8-hour and 1-hour CO standards.

Greenhouse Gas and Global Climate Change Background
GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:
• Carbon dioxide (CO
2);
• Methane (CH4);
• Nitrous oxide (N2O);
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs);

1 California Air Resources Board. 2021. iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. Website: www.arb.ca.gov/adam (accessed July 2022).
172
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 5 • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and
• Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

Over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global warming. While manmade GHGs include naturally occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, some gases, such as HFCs, PFCs, and SF6, are completely new to the atmosphere.

Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation.

These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), which is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of each gas is measured relative to CO 2, the most abundant GHG; the definition
of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO
2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e).

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Air quality and GHG standards and the regulatory framework are discussed below.

Federal Regulations
At the federal level, the USEPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs.

USEPA air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), which was enacted in 1963. The FCAA was amended in 1970, 1977, and 1990.

The United States has historically had a voluntary approach to reducing GHG emissions. However, on April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the USEPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the FCAA. While there currently are no adopted federal regulations for the control or reduction of GHG emissions, the USEPA commenced several actions in 2009 to implement a regulatory approach to global climate change. This includes the 2009 USEPA final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emission sources in the United States.

Additionally, the USEPA Administrator signed an endangerment finding action in 2009 under the Clean Air Act, finding that six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6) constitute a threat to public health and welfare, and that the combined emissions from motor vehicles cause and contribute to global climate change, leading to national GHG emission standards. 173
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 6 California Air Resources Board
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the State’s “clean air agency.” The CARB’s goals are to attain and maintain healthy air quality, protect the public from exposure to toxic air contaminants, and oversee compliance with air pollution rules and regulations. The CARB is also the lead agency for implementing climate change regulations in the State. Since its formation, the CARB has worked with the public, the business sector, and local governments to find solutions to California’s air pollution problems. Key efforts by the State are described below.

Assembly Bill 2588 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act Under Assembly Bill (AB) 2588, stationary sources of air pollutants are required to report the types and quantities of certain substances their facilities routinely released into the air. The goals of the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Act are to collect emission data, identify facilities having localized impacts, determine health risks, and notify nearby residents of significant risks.

The California Air Resources Board Handbook
The CARB has developed an Air Quality and Land Use Handbook 1 which is intended to serve as a
general reference guide for evaluating and reducing air pollution impacts associated with new projects that go through the land use decision-making process. According to the CARB Handbook, recent air pollution studies have shown an association between respiratory and other noncancer health effects and proximity to high traffic roadways. Other studies have shown that diesel exhaust and other cancer-causing chemicals emitted from cars and trucks are responsible for much of the overall cancer risk from airborne toxics in California. The CARB Handbook recommends that county and city planning agencies strongly consider proximity to these sources when finding new locations for “sensitive” land uses such as homes, medical facilities, day-care centers, schools, and playgrounds.

Land use designations with air pollution sources of concern include freeways, rail yards, ports, refineries, distribution centers, chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and large gasoline service stations. Key recommendations in the CARB Handbook include taking steps to avoid siting new, sensitive land uses, including:
• Within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day;
• Within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard; • Immediately downwind of ports (in the most heavily impacted zones) and petroleum refineries; • Within 300 feet of any dry cleaning operation (for operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet); and

1 CARB. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April. 174
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 7 • Within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater).

The CARB Handbook specifically states that its recommendations are advisory and acknowledges land use agencies have to balance other considerations, including housing and transportation needs, economic development priorities, and other quality of life issues.

The recommendations are generalized and do not consider site-specific meteorology, freeway truck percentages, or other factors that influence risk for a particular project site. The purpose of this guidance is to further examine project sites for actual health risk associated with the location of new, sensitive land uses.

Assembly Bill 32 (2006), California Global Warming Solutions Act California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is AB 32, passed by the State legislature on August 31, 2006. This effort aims at reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The CARB has established the level of GHG emissions in 1990 at 427 million metric tons (MMT) CO2e. The emissions target of 427 MMT requires the reduction of 169 MMT from the State’s projected business-as-usual 2020 emissions of 596 MMT. AB 32 requires the CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline and to reduce GHGs that contribute to global climate change. The Scoping Plan was approved by the CARB on December 11, 2008, and contains the main strategies California will implement to achieve the reduction of approximately 169 MMT of CO
2e, or approximately 30 percent, from the State’s projected 2020 emission level of 596 MMT of CO2e under a business-as-usual scenario (this is a reduction of 42 MMT CO2e, or almost 10 percent from 2002–2004 average emissions). The Scoping Plan also includes CARB-recommended GHG reductions for each emissions sector of the State’s GHG inventory. The Scoping Plan calls for the largest reductions in GHG emissions to be achieved by implementing the following measures and standards:
• Improved emissions standards for light-duty vehicles (estimated reductions of 31.7 MMT CO 2e)
• The Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (15.0 MMT CO2e)
• Energy efficiency measures in buildings and appliances and the widespread development of combined heat and power systems (26.3 MMT CO2e)
• A renewable portfolio standard for electricity production (21.3 MMT CO2e) The Scoping Plan identifies 18 emission reduction measures that address cap-and-trade programs, vehicle gas standards, energy efficiency, low carbon fuel standards, renewable energy, regional transportation-related GHG targets, vehicle efficiency measures, goods movement, solar roof programs, industrial emissions, high-speed rail, green building strategies, recycling, sustainable forests, water, and air. The measures would result in a total reduction of 174 MMT CO 2e by 2020.

On August 24, 2011, the CARB unanimously approved both the new supplemental assessment and reapproved its Scoping Plan, which provides the overall roadmap and rule measures to carry out AB 32. The CARB also approved a more robust California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 175
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 8 equivalent document supporting the supplemental analysis of the cap-and-trade program. The cap-and-trade took effect on January 1, 2012, with an enforceable compliance obligation that began January 1, 2013.

The CARB approved the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The First Update identifies opportunities to leverage existing and new funds to further drive GHG emission reductions through strategic planning and targeted low carbon investments. The First Update defines CARB climate change priorities until 2020 and also sets the groundwork to reach long-term goals set forth in Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-16-2012. The Update highlights California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals as defined in the initial Scoping Plan. It also evaluates how to align the State’s “longer-term” GHG reduction strategies with other State policy priorities for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use. The CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan,1 to reflect the 2030 target set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by Senate Bill (SB) 32.

The 2022 Scoping Plan2 assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan Update focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

Senate Bill 375 (2008)
Signed into law on October 1, 2008, SB 375 supplements GHG reductions from new vehicle technology and fuel standards with reductions from more efficient land use patterns and improved transportation. Under the law, the CARB approved GHG reduction targets in February 2011 for California’s 18 federally designated regional planning bodies, known as Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The CARB may update the targets every 4 years and must update them every 8 years. MPOs in turn must demonstrate how their plans, policies, and transportation investments meet the targets set by the CARB through Sustainable Community Strategies (SCS). The SCS are included with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a report required by State law. However, if an MPO finds that its SCS will not meet the GHG reduction target, it may prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy (APS). The APS identifies the impediments to achieving the targets.

Executive Order B-30-15 (2015)
Governor Jerry Brown signed Executive Order B-30-15 on April 29, 2015, which added the immediate target of:
• GHG emissions should be reduced to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

1 California Air Resources Board. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. 2 CARB. 2021. 2022 Scoping Plan Update. May 10. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/ 2022-12/2022-sp.pdf (accessed October 2023).
176
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 9 All State agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. The CARB was directed to update the AB 32 Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target and therefore is moving forward with the update process. The mid-term target is critical to help frame the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure needed to continue reducing emissions.

Senate Bill 350 (2015) Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act SB 350, signed by Governor Jerry Brown on October 7, 2015, updates and enhances AB 32 by introducing the following set of objectives in clean energy, clean air, and pollution reduction for 2030:
• Raise California’s renewable portfolio standard from 33 percent to 50 percent. • Increase energy efficiency in buildings by 50 percent by the year 2030.

The 50 percent renewable energy standard will be implemented by the California Public Utilities Commission for the private utilities and by the California Energy Commission for municipal utilities.

Each utility must submit a procurement plan showing it will purchase clean energy to displace other nonrenewable resources. The 50 percent increase in energy efficiency in buildings must be achieved through the use of existing energy efficiency retrofit funding and regulatory tools already available to State energy agencies under existing law. The addition made by this legislation requires State energy agencies to plan for and implement those programs in a manner that achieves the energy efficiency target.

Senate Bill 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2016, and Assembly Bill 197 In the summer of 2016, the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed, SB 32 and AB 197. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in Governor Brown’s April 2015 Executive Order B-30-15. SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps us on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels, consistent with an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) analysis of the emissions trajectory that would stabilize atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 parts per million CO 2e and
reduce the likelihood of catastrophic impacts from climate change.

The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 meant to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by the CARB was posted in December 2016.

Senate Bill 100
On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, which raises California’s renewable portfolio standard requirements to 60 percent by 2030, with interim targets, and 100 percent by 2045. The bill also establishes a State policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero- carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045. Under the 177
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 10 bill, the State cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.

Executive Order B-55-18
Executive Order B-55-18, signed on September 10, 2018, sets a goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.” Executive Order B-55-18 directs the CARB to work with relevant State agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. The goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 is in addition to other statewide goals, meaning not only should emissions be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, but that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions be offset by equivalent net removals of CO 2e from the atmosphere,
including through sequestration in forests, soils, and other natural landscapes.

Assembly Bill (AB) 1279
AB 1279 was signed in September of 2022, and codifies the State goals of achieving net carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative GHG emissions thereafter. This bill also requires California to reduce statewide GHG emissions by 85 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2045 and directs CARB to work with relevant state agencies to achieve these goals.

Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule
On March 21, 2020, the USEPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021–2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.1 The SAFE Vehicles Rule amends certain existing Corporate Average Fuel Economy and tailpipe CO2 emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establishes new standards, all covering model years 2021 through 2026. More specifically, NHTSA set new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for model years 2022 through 2026 and amended its 2021 model year Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, and the USEPA amended its CO2 emission standards for model years 2021 and later.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The SJVAPCD has specific air quality-related planning documents, rules, and regulations. This section summarizes the local planning documents and regulations that may be applicable to the proposed project as administered by the SJVAPCD with CARB oversight.

Rule 8011—General Requirements: Fugitive Dust Emission Sources Fugitive dust regulations are applicable to outdoor fugitive dust sources. Operations, including construction operations, must control fugitive dust emissions in accordance with SJVAPCD

1 United States Department of Transportation. 2020. The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient “SAFE” Vehicle Rule. March 31. Website: https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-economy/safe#:~:text =The%20Safer%20Affordable%20Fuel%2DEfficient%20(SAFE)%20Vehicles%20Rule%2C,model%20years%2 02021%20through%202026 (accessed July 2022).
178
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 11 Regulation VIII. According to Rule 8011, the SJVAPCD requires the implementation of control measures for fugitive dust emission sources.

Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts The SJVAPCD prepared the GAMAQI to assist lead agencies and project applicants in evaluating the potential air quality impacts of projects in the SJVAB. The GAMAQI provides SJVAPCD-recommended procedures for evaluating potential air quality impacts during the CEQA environmental review process. The GAMAQI provides guidance on evaluating short-term (construction) and long-term (operational) air emissions. The most recent version of the GAMAQI, adopted on March 19, 2015, was used in this evaluation. It contains guidance on the following:
• Criteria and thresholds for determining whether a project may have a significant adverse air quality impact
• Specific procedures and modeling protocols for quantifying and analyzing air quality impacts • Methods to mitigate air quality impacts
• Information for use in air quality assessments and environmental documents, including air quality, regulatory setting, climate, and topography data Climate Change Action Plan
In August 2008, the SJVAPCD adopted the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP). 1 The CCAP directed
the SJVAPCD to develop guidance to assist lead agencies, project proponents, permit applicants, and interested parties in assessing and reducing the impacts of project-specific GHG emissions on global climate change.

In December 2009, the SJVAPCD adopted the document: Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA2 and the policy: District Policy – Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency.3 The guidance and policy rely on the use of performance-based standards, otherwise known as Best Performance Standards (BPS),4 to assess significance of project-specific GHG emissions on global climate change during the environmental review process, as required by CEQA.

Projects implementing BPS in accordance with SJVAPCD’s guidance would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact on GHG emissions and would not require project-specific quantification of GHG emissions.

1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2008. Climate Change Action Plan. November. 2 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2009. Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. December 17. 3 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2009. Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency. December 17. 4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2009. Final Staff Report Appendix J: GHG Emission Reduction Measures – Development Projects. December 17. 179
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 12 City of Clovis
General Plan. The City of Clovis (City) addresses air quality in the Air Quality Element of the City’s General Plan.1 The Air Quality Element contains goals and policies that work to improve air quality through effective land use and transportation planning, regional cooperation, and a reduction in emissions. The following policies from the Air Quality Element are applicable for the proposed project:
• Policy 1.2: Sensitive Land Uses. Prohibit, without sufficient mitigation, the future siting of sensitive land uses within the distances of emissions 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 1.8: Trees. Maintain or plant trees where appropriate to provide shade, absorb carbon, improve oxygenation, slow stormwater runoff, and reduce the heat island effect. • 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.

METHODOLOGY
Construction Emissions
Construction activities can generate a substantial amount of air pollution. Construction activities are considered temporary; however, short-term impacts can contribute to exceedances of air quality standards. Construction activities include site preparation, earthmoving, and general construction.

The emissions generated from these common construction activities include fugitive dust from soil disturbance, fuel combustion from mobile heavy-duty diesel- and gasoline-powered equipment, portable auxiliary equipment, and worker commute trips. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4.0 computer program was used to calculate emissions from on-site construction equipment and emissions from worker and vehicle trips to the site.

As discussed in the Project Description, construction of the proposed project is expected to begin in January 2023
2, which was included in CalEEMod. The proposed project would not require any soil import or export but would include the demolition of the existing residence, which was also

1 Clovis, City of. 2014. City of Clovis General Plan, Air Quality Element. August. Website: https://cityofclovis. com/planning-and-development/planning/master-plans/general-plan/air-quality-element/ (accessed July 2022).
2 The CalEEMod analysis evaluated project construction emissions with a start date of January 2023 and a duration of approximately 11 months. The proposed project’s construction schedule has since been modified that project construction would begin later; however, project construction would still occur over an 11-month duration. This minimal modification to the project construction schedule would not result in more severe air quality or greenhouse gas impacts than what is described within. 180
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 13 included in CalEEMod. Other detailed construction information is currently unavailable; therefore, this analysis utilizes CalEEMod default assumptions. This analysis also assumes use of Tier 2 construction equipment, as required by current CARB regulations for off-road vehicles.

Construction Health Risk Assessment
A construction health risk assessment (HRA), which evaluates construction-period health risk to off- site receptors, was performed for the proposed project, and the analysis is presented below. To estimate the potential cancer risk associated with construction of the proposed project from equipment exhaust (including diesel particulate matter), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to a concentration at the receptor location of interest (i.e., a nearby residence and worksites). Dispersion modeling varies from a simpler, more conservative screening-level analysis to a more complex and refined detailed analysis. This refined assessment was conducted using the CARB exposure methodology with the air dispersion modeling performed using the USEPA dispersion model AERMOD. The model provides a detailed estimate of exhaust concentrations based on site and source geometry, source emissions strength, distance from the source to the receptor, and meteorological data. CARB’s Hot Spots Analysis & Reporting Program (HARP2) software was utilized to complete the risk analysis, consistent with guidance from the SJVAPCD.

Operational Emissions
This air quality analysis includes estimating emissions associated with long-term operation of the project. Indirect emissions of criteria pollutants with regional impacts would be emitted by project- generated vehicle trips. In addition, localized air quality impacts (i.e., higher carbon monoxide concentrations or “hot-spots”) near intersections or roadway segments in the project vicinity would also potentially occur due to project-generated vehicle trips.

Consistent with the SJVAPCD’s guidance for estimating emissions, the CalEEMod computer program was used to calculate the long-term operational emissions associated with the project. The analysis was conducted using land use codes Apartment Low Rise, Parking Lot, and City Park. As identified in the Project Description, the proposed project is expected to generate 175 trips per day, which was included in CalEEMod. Where project-specific data were not available, default assumptions (e.g., energy usage, water usage, and solid waste generation) from CalEEMod were used to estimate project emissions. CalEEMod output sheets are attached.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG emissions associated with the project would occur over the short-term from construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust. There would also be long-term GHG emissions associated with project-related vehicle trips. Recognizing that the field of global climate change analysis is rapidly evolving, the approaches advocated most recently indicate that for determining a project’s contribution to GHG emissions, lead agencies should calculate, or estimate, emissions from vehicular traffic, energy consumption, water conveyance and treatment, waste generation, construction activities, and any other significant source of emissions within the project area. The CalEEMod results were used to quantify GHG emissions generated by the project. 181
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 14 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse air quality impact if project-generated pollutant emissions would:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard; • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The SJVAPCD defines emissions thresholds in the GAMAQI, established based on the attainment status of the air basin in regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission thresholds (Table B) are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks. The related impacts are discussed further in the Impact Analysis section.

Table B: SJVAPCD Construction and Operation Thresholds of Significance (Tons per Year)
CO NOx ROG SOx PM10 PM2.5
Construction Thresholds 100 10 10 27 15 15
Operation Thresholds 100 10 10 27 15 15
Source: Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (SJVAPCD 2015).

CO = carbon monoxide
NOX = nitrous oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
ROG = reactive organic compounds
SJVAPCD = San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SOX = sulfur oxide

The emissions thresholds in the SJVAPCD GAMAQI were established based on the attainment status of the air basin in regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants.1 Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission thresholds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks.

1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Op. cit. 182
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 15 The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse GHG emission impact if the project would:
• Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Neither the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, nor SJVAPCD has developed or adopted numeric GHG significance thresholds. Therefore, this analysis evaluates the GHG emissions based on the project’s consistency with State GHG reduction goals.

PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
The proposed project would release emissions over the long term associated with traffic generation and operation of the project site. Emissions would include criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions.

The sections below describe the proposed project’s consistency with applicable air quality plans, estimated project emissions, and the significance of impacts with respect to CEQA and consistency with the SJVAPCD’s rules and regulations.

Air Quality
Consistency with Applicable Air Quality Plans
An air quality plan describes air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or region classified as a nonattainment area. The main purpose of the air quality plan is to bring the area into compliance with the requirements of the federal and State air quality standards. To bring the San Joaquin Valley into attainment, the SJVAPCD adopted the 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard in June 2016 to satisfy Clean Air Act requirements and ensure attainment of the 75 parts per billion (ppb) 8-hour ozone standard.1
To ensure the SJVAB’s continued attainment of the USEPA PM10 standard, the SJVAPCD adopted the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan in September 2007.2 The SJVAPCD adopted the 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards in November 2018 to address the USEPA 1997 annual PM2.5 standard of 15 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) and 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 65 µg/m3, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 μg/m³, and the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard of 12 μg/m³.3

1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2016. 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard.

June 16. Website: www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone-Plan-2016.htm (accessed July 2022). 2 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2007. 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation. Available online at: www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/docs/Maintenance%20Plan10- 25-07.pdf (accessed July 2022).
3 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2018. 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards. November 15. Website: http://valleyair.org/pmplans/documents/2018/pm-plan- adopted/2018-Plan-for-the-1997-2006-and-2012-PM2.5-Standards.pdf (accessed July 2022). 183
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 16 CEQA requires that certain proposed projects be analyzed for consistency with the applicable air quality plan. For a project to be consistent with SJVAPCD air quality plans, the pollutants emitted from a project should not exceed the SJVAPCD emission thresholds or cause a significant impact on air quality. In addition, emission reductions achieved through implementation of offset requirements are a major component of the SJVAPCD air quality plans. As discussed below, construction of the proposed project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed the SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Implementation of Condition of Approval (COA) AIR-1, provided below, would further reduce construction dust impacts. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project would also not exceed SJVAPCD established significance thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of SJVAPCD air quality plans.

Criteria Pollutant Analysis
In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the SJVAPCD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. The following analysis assesses the potential construction- and operation-related air quality impacts.

Construction Emissions. During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate matter emissions (i.e., fugitive dust) generated by grading, hauling, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, nitrous oxides (NO
x), reactive organic gases (ROG), directly emitted particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and toxic air contaminants (TACs) such as diesel exhaust particulate matter.

Site preparation and project construction would include the following tasks: demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coatings. Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site.

Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. The SJVAPCD has established Regulation VIII measures for reducing fugitive dust emissions (PM
10). With the implementation of Regulation VIII measures, fugitive dust emissions from construction activities would not result in adverse air quality impacts.

In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, ROGs, and some soot particulate (PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles are delayed. 184
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 17 These emissions would be temporary and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site.

CalEEMod was used to calculate emissions from on-site construction equipment and emissions from worker and vehicle trips to the site. Construction-related emissions are presented in Table C, below.

CalEEMod output sheets are attached.

Table C: Project Construction Emissions (Tons/year)
Project Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions 0.4 2.1 1.7 <0.1 0.1 0.1
SJVAPCD Thresholds 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceeds? No No No No No No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2022).

As shown in Table C, construction emissions associated with the project would not exceed the SJVAPCD’s thresholds for ROG, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. In addition to the construction period thresholds of significance, the SJVAPCD has implemented Regulation VIII measures for dust control during construction. Implementation of COA AIR-1 would ensure that the proposed project complies with Regulation VIII.

COA AIR-1 Consistent with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), the following controls are required to be included as specifications for the proposed project and implemented at the construction site:
• All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant or covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
• All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. • When materials are transported off site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. 185
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 18 • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
• Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/ suppressant.

Construction emissions associated with the proposed project would be less than significant with implementation of COA AIR-1. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard.

Operational Emissions. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), energy sources (e.g., electricity and natural gas), and area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment) related to the proposed project.

PM
10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement, and the vehicle wakes generate airborne dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small compared to the other PM emission processes.

Gasoline-powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions compared with diesel- powered vehicles.

Energy source emissions result from activities in buildings for which electricity and natural gas are used. The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e., the amount of electricity or natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source. The proposed project would generate a minimal amount of energy source emissions, which would primarily be associated with lighting and heating.

Typically, area source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions located at the project site, including architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment. Area source emissions associated with the project would include emissions from the use of landscaping equipment.

Emission estimates for operation of the project were calculated using CalEEMod. The primary emissions associated with the project are regional in nature, meaning that air pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release or, in the case of vehicle emissions associated with the project, emissions are released in other areas of the SJVAB. The annual emissions associated with project operational trip generation, energy, and area sources are identified in Table D for ROG, NO x, CO, sulfur oxide (SOx),
PM10, and PM2.5. CalEEMod output sheets are attached.
186
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 19 As shown in Table D, the proposed project would not exceed annual criteria pollutant significance thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS.

Table D: Project Operation Emissions (Tons per Year)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Area Source Emissions 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy Source Emissions <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile Source Emissions 0.1 0.1 0.8 <0.1 0.2 0.1
Total Project Operation Emissions 0.2 0.2 1.0 <0.1 0.2 0.1 SJVAPCD Significance Threshold 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2022).

Note: Some values may not appear to add up correctly due to rounding.

Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants. Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, day-care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site include single-family residences located immediately north and west of the project site boundary, as well as a school located to the east of the proposed project site.

Construction of the proposed project may expose these surrounding sensitive receptors to airborne particulates, as well as a small quantity of construction equipment pollutants (i.e., usually diesel- fueled vehicles and equipment). As such, a construction HRA, which evaluates construction-period health risk to off-site receptors, was performed for the proposed project and is summarized below.

According to the SJVAPCD, a project would result in a significant impact if it would: individually expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 20.0 in one million or an increased non-cancer risk of greater than 1.0 on the hazard index (chronic or acute).

The proposed project site is located in an urban area in close proximity to existing residential uses that could be exposed to diesel emission exhaust during the construction period. As such, to estimate the potential cancer risk from project construction equipment exhaust (including diesel particulate matter), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to a concentration at the receptor location (i.e., a nearby residential land use). Dispersion modeling varies from a simpler, more conservative screening-level analysis to a more complex and refined detailed analysis. This refined assessment was conducted using CARB’s exposure methodology, with the air dispersion modeling performed using the USEPA dispersion model 187
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 20 AERMOD. The model provides a detailed estimate of exhaust concentrations based on site and source geometry, source emissions strength, distance from the source to the receptor, and site- specific meteorological data.

Table E below identifies the results of the analysis utilizing the CalEEMod outputs, assuming the use of Tier 2 construction equipment. Model snapshots of the sources are provided in Attachment B.

Table E: Unmitigated Inhalation Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors
Carcinogenic Inhalation Health
Risk in One Million
Chronic Inhalation
Hazard Index
Acute Inhalation
Hazard Index
Residential Receptor Risk 39.29 0.044 0.000
School Receptor Risk 63.78 0.072 0.000
Threshold 20.0 1.0 1.0
Exceed? Yes No No
Source: LSA (October 2023).

As shown in Table E, the maximum cancer risk for the school receptor MEI would be 63.78 in one million, which would exceed the SJVAPCD cancer risk threshold of 20 in one million. The residential receptor risk would be lower at 39.29 in one million and would also exceed the threshold. The total chronic hazard index would be 0.044 for the residential receptor MEI and 0.072 for the school receptor MEI, which would both be below the threshold of 1.0. In addition, the total acute hazard index would be nominal (0.000), which would also not exceed the threshold of 1.0. Therefore, since the maximum cancer risk for the residential and school receptor MEI would exceed the SJVAPCD threshold, implementation of COA AIR-2 would be required to reduce substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction by requiring the use of Tier 4 construction equipment.

CO
A AIR-2 During construction of the proposed project, the project contractor shall ensure all off-road diesel-powered construction equipment of 50 horsepower or more used for the project construction at a minimum meets the California Air Resources Board Tier 4 Final emissions standards or equivalent. Verification shall be provided to the City of Clovis for confirmation.

Table F identifies the results of the analysis with implementation of COA AIR-2.

Table F: Mitigated Inhalation Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors
Carcinogenic Inhalation Health
Risk in One Million
Chronic Inhalation
Hazard Index
Acute Inhalation
Hazard Index
Residential Receptor Risk 2.45 0.003 0.000
School Receptor Risk 3.99 0.004 0.000
Threshold 20.0 1.0 1.0
Exceed? No No No
Source: LSA (October 2023).
188
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 21 As shown in Table F, the mitigated cancer risk at the residential receptor MEI would be 2.45 in one million and the mitigated cancer risk at the school receptor MEI would be 3.99 in one million, which would not exceed the SJVAPCD cancer risk of 20 in one million. Therefore, with implementation of COA AIR-2, construction of the proposed project would not exceed SJVAPCD thresholds and would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Once the project is constructed, the project would not be a source of substantial emissions.

Therefore, sensitive receptors are not expected to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction and operation.

Objectionable Odors
The SJVAPCD addresses odor criteria within the GAMAQI. The district has not established a rule or standard regarding odor emissions, rather, the district has a nuisance rule: “Any project with the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors should be deemed to have a significant impact.”
During project construction, some odors may be present due to diesel exhaust. However, these odors would be temporary and limited to the construction period. The proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. The fuel pumps are not expected to result in odors as they would be equipped with vapor recovery systems. Any odors in general would be confined mainly to the project site and would readily dissipate. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section discusses the project’s impacts related to the release of GHG emissions for both construction and operational phases of the project.

Construction GHG Emissions. Construction-related GHG emissions are typically emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically uses fossil-based fuels to operate. Construction activities, such as grading, site preparation, and construction, on-site construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from a project site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew typically produce combustion emissions from various sources.

The SJVAPCD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. However, lead agencies are encouraged to quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction. Using CalEEMod, it is estimated that construction of the proposed project would generate a total of approximately 243.9 metric tons of CO 2e.

Operational GHG Emissions. Long-term GHG emissions are typically generated from mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks, and buses), area sources (e.g., maintenance activities and landscaping), indirect 189
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 22 emissions from sources associated with energy consumption, waste sources (land filling and waste disposal), and water sources (water supply and conveyance, treatment, and distribution). Mobile- source GHG emissions would include project-generated vehicle trips to and from the project. Area- source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance on the project site. Energy source emissions would be generated at off-site utility providers as a result of increased electricity demand generated by the project. Waste source emissions generated by the proposed project include energy generated by land filling and other methods of disposal related to transporting and managing project-generated waste. In addition, water source emissions associated with the proposed project are generated by water supply and conveyance, water treatment, water distribution, and wastewater treatment.

Emissions estimates for operation of the proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod. Table G shows the emissions sources by category; mobile source emissions are the largest category, at approximately 78.6 percent of total CO
2e emissions, followed by energy source emissions at
approximately 12.4 percent of the total, area source emissions at approximately 4.9 percent of the total, waste source emissions at approximately 2.5 percent of the total, and water source emissions with 1.5 percent of the total emissions. CalEEMod output sheets are attached.

Table G: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Category
Operational Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Percent of Total
Area Source 11.6 <0.1 <0.1 11.7 4.9
Energy Source 29.2 <0.1 <0.1 29.4 12.4
Mobile Source 183.0 <0.1 <0.1 186.1 78.6
Waste Source 2.4 0.1 0.0 6.0 2.5
Water Source 1.7 0.1 <0.1 3.5 1.5
Total Operational 236.8 100.0
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2022).

Note = Some values may not appear to add up correctly due to rounding.

CH4 = methane
CO2 = carbon dioxide
CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent
N2O = nitrous oxide

As shown in Table G, the proposed project would generate approximately 236.8 metric tons of CO2e annually. The SJVAPCD has not established a numeric threshold for GHG emissions. As discussed, the significance of GHG emissions may be evaluated based on locally adopted quantitative thresholds or consistency with a regional GHG reduction plan (such as a Climate Action Plan). Neither the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, nor SJVAPCD has developed or adopted numeric GHG significance thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project was analyzed for consistency with State GHG reduction goals, as discussed below.

Consistency with Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plans
The proposed project was analyzed for consistency with the goals of the 2022 Scoping Plan, Executive Order B-30-15, SB 32, and AB 197. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate 190
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 23 change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in Executive Order B-30-15. SB 32 keeps us on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels, consistent with a PCC analysis of the global emissions trajectory that would stabilize atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 parts per million CO2e and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic impacts from climate change.

The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB in the following areas related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by the CARB was posted in December 2016.

In addition, the 2022 Scoping Plan assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on building clean energy production and distribution infrastructure for a carbon-neutral future, including transitioning existing energy production and transmission infrastructure to produce zero-carbon electricity and hydrogen, and utilizing biogas resulting from wildfire management or landfill and dairy operations, among other substitutes. The 2022 Scoping Plan states that in almost all sectors, electrification will play an important role. The 2022 Scoping Plan evaluates clean energy and technology options and the transition away from fossil fuels, including adding four times the solar and wind capacity by 2045 and about 1,700 times the amount of current hydrogen supply. As discussed in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO N-79-20 requires that all new passenger vehicles sold in California will be zero-emission by 2035, and all other fleets will have transitioned to zero-emission as fully possible by 2045, which will reduce the percentage of fossil fuel combustion vehicles. The measures applicable to the proposed project include energy efficiency measures, water conservation and efficiency measures, and transportation and motor vehicle measures, as discussed below.

Energy efficient measures are intended to maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the California Code of Regulations, established by the California Energy Commission and the City’s current building code, regarding energy conservation and green building standards. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with applicable energy measures.

Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, the project would be required to 191
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx) 24 comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the California Code of Regulations, which includes a variety of different measures, including reduction of wastewater and water use. In addition, the proposed project would install low maintenance landscape features. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the water conservation and efficiency measures.

The goal of transportation and motor vehicle measures is to develop regional GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles. The second phase of Pavley standards will reduce GHG emissions from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025, resulting in a 3 percent decrease in average vehicle emissions for all vehicles by 2020. Specific regional emission targets for transportation emissions would not directly apply to the proposed project. However, vehicles traveling to the project site would comply with the Pavley II (LEV III) Advanced Clean Cars Program.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified transportation and motor vehicle measures.

Therefore, the proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in Executive Order B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and AB1279 and would be consistent with applicable plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis presented above, with implementation of COA AIR-1, construction and operational activities associated with the proposed project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. In addition, with implementation of COA AIR-2, the proposed project is not expected to produce significant emissions that would affect nearby sensitive receptors. The proposed project would also not result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The project would also not result in the emission of substantial GHG emissions. Additionally, the project would not conflict with the State’s GHG emissions reductions objectives embodied in Executive Order B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, or AB 1279. Therefore, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to cumulative GHG emissions would not be cumulatively considerable.

Attachments: A: CalEEMod Output Sheets
B: HRA Model Snapshots
192
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

10/13/23 (\\lsaazfiles.file.core.windows.net\projects\HPT2201 DeWolf Apartments\PRODUCTS\AQ GHG\DeWolf Apartments AQ GHG Memo 101323.docx)

ATTACHMENT A

CALEEMOD OUTPUT SHEETS

193
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

DeWolf Apartments Project
Fresno County, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Total project site is 1.63 acres
Construction Phase - Default schedule
Demolition - Demolition of a single-family residnece
Grading - Balanced site, no soil export or import
Vehicle Trips - Based on a trip generation of 175 ADT
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - construction equipment tier 2 Area Mitigation -
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation - Project would implement low mainatance landscape features

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
Parking Lot

26.00 Space

0.23 10,400.00
0 City Park

0.10 Acre

0.10 4,356.00
0 Apartments Low Rise

26.00 Dwelling Unit

1.30 26,000.00
74 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)

2.2 45

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2024
Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98

0.033
CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 7/14/2022 4:51 PM

Page 1 of 33 ends

Clovis City CouncilApril 15, 2024

Clovis City Council
April 15, 2024