Agenda packet — Clovis City Council, March 4, 2025 (part 3 of 3)

7.0 AS-BUILT FOUNDATION DATA
The closest structure to the proposed Project is the Enterprise Canal Box Culvert (Bridge No. 42- 0422). Based on the as-built plans, the reinforced concrete box culvert has a width of approximately 22 feet and spans diagonally across the SR-168. The structure comprises inlet and outlet wingwalls. The box culvert and wing walls are supported on shallow foundations.

The available plans are presented in Appendix III-B.

8.0 SCOUR DATA
The subject was considered and was determined not applicable to the proposed structure because the proposed Project does not span a watercourse.

9.0 CORROSION EVALUATION
No corrosion studies were conducted by PARIKH at this stage. The “Foundation Report, Temperance Expressway Undercrossing at State Route 168, State Bridge No. 42-0410 L/R, Clovis, California” (Kleinfelder, 1998) provides corrosion potential test results for three composite samples. The Temperance Expressway Undercrossing is located approximately 1,760 feet southwest of the proposed Project. The corrosion test results are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 – Corrosion Test Results
Sample No. (1)
Minimum
Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
pH Chloride
(ppm)
Sulfate
(ppm) Corrosive? (2)
A 1,850 7.87 < 0.1 95.4 No
B 4,090 6.46 < 0.1 9.9 No
C 3,960 6.67 < 0.1 3.6 No
Notes:
(1) Composite sample details:
- Sample A: Composite sample consisting of soils from Boring TB-1 at Elev. 347.1, 336.6, and 346.5 feet.
- Sample B: Composite sample consisting of soils from Boring TB-2 at Elev. 384.5, 381.9, and 376.0 feet.
- Sample C: Composite sample consisting of soils from Boring TB-3 at Elev. 385.5, 380.9, and 375.3 feet.
(2) According to the Corrosion Module of the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual dated March 2022, for structural elements, Caltrans considers a site to be corrosive if one or more of the following conditions exist for the representative soil and/or water samples taken at the site:
- Chloride concentration is 500 ppm or greater
- Sulfate concentration is 1,500 ppm or greater
- pH is 5.5 or less
350
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 6 ends

Based on current Caltrans standards, the Project site soils are considered non-corrosive.

Chemical tests should be performed in the PS&E phase of the Project on geotechnical samples to confirm the corrosion potential of the site soils.

10.0 SEISMIC INFORMATION
The proposed Project lies in central California within one of the most seismically active areas in the United States. Plate 3 in Appendix I shows the location of major faults and fault systems in relation to the proposed Project. The closest active faults to the Project are the historic aged Great Valley Thrust System, Section 13 and Section 14, located about 45 and 56 miles to the southwest respectively.

Section 13 dips 10 to 15 degrees to the southwest and strikes at about 130 degrees. The fault has been associated with several earthquakes, including a 6.3M which occurred in 1983 and partly destroyed the town of Coalinga. Section 14 dips 22 degrees to the west and strikes at about 100 degrees.

10.1 Ground Motion Hazard
The recommended design response spectra for the Project site were determined using the Caltrans ARS Online tool (V3.0.2) which is consistent with the Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC) version 2.0 (V2.0).

For Caltrans SDC, V2.0, the Design Spectrum is based on the USGS 975-year uniform hazard spectrum only. Effective December 1, 2019, the USGS hazard spectrum is based on the 2014 National Hazard Map per the memorandum from the State Bridge Engineer. The updated Design Spectrum continues the use of near-fault adjustment factors and basin amplification factors. The only change to these factors is the use of the Campbell- Bozorgnia (2014) and Chiou-Youngs (2014) basin amplification factors, updated from their 2008 models.

The development of the design ARS curve is based on several input parameters, including site location (longitude/latitude), average shear wave velocity for the top 30 meters/100 feet (vs30), and other site parameters, such as fault characteristics and site-to-fault distances.

Average shear wave velocities for the top 100 feet of soils at the site were estimated by using established correlations and procedure provided in Caltrans Methodology for Developing Design Response Spectrum for use in Seismic Design Recommendations (2012). Shear wave velocity calculations are presented in Appendix IV-1. 351
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 7 ends

Based on the subsurface data, the site is classified as “Class S2 Soil” per Caltrans SDC, V2.0, which will need to be verified during the PS&E phase of the Project. The site location and the relevant parameters are summarized in Table 3, the recommended design ARS curve is presented in Plate 4 in Appendix I, and the Caltrans ARS Online tool output in Appendix II.

Table 3 – Recommended Ground Motion Parameters for Geotechnical Design Site Parameters Design Ground Motion Parameters
(Return Period = 975 years)
Locations Shear-Wave
Velocity vS30,
m/sec
Horizontal Peak
Ground
Acceleration
(HPGA) (1), g
Mean
Earthquake (1) M,
Moment
Magnitude
Mean Site-to-fault/
Rupture Surface
Distance (1) Rrup, mi Latitude,
degrees
Longitude,
degrees

36.84538°N 119.65925°W 233 0.24 6.29 53.9
Notes:
(1) Based on the Caltrans web tool ARS Online (Version 3.0.2).

Additional field explorations should be performed in the PS&E phase of the Project to confirm the shear wave velocity and the design ARS curve.

10.2 Other Seismic Hazards
Primary seismic hazards include ground shaking and surface fault rupture. Secondary seismic effects resulting from soil responses to ground shaking include liquefaction and landslides. These hazards may cause deformation of man-made structures and are discussed in the following sections.

Earthquake-induced ground-shaking is a seismic hazard that can result in liquefaction, lurching, lateral spreading of soils, and landslide of soil and rock as well as the dynamic oscillation of man-made structures. Differential settlements can occur at the ground surface due to subsurface liquefaction and densification caused by strong ground-shaking.

The Project site has been determined not to have the potential for surface fault rupture, liquefaction, seismic-induced slope failure, or tsunami.

10.2.1 Surface Fault Rupture Potential
The California Geological Survey has not yet developed Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation maps or Seismic Hazard Zone Reports for the site enclosing the Clovis 7.5-minute Quadrangle; hence the Project does not lay within an Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or Seismic Hazard Zone.

352
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 8 ends

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) Quaternary Fault and Fold Database shows that the Project is not located within 1,000 feet of an unzoned fault that is Holocene/latest Pleistocene (15,000 years) or younger in age. Accordingly, a Surface Fault Rupture Displacement Hazard Analysis, as per the Caltrans Fault Rupture module, is not required.

Therefore, per Memo-To-Designers (MTD) 20-10, the structure is not considered susceptible to surface fault rupture hazards.

10.2.2 Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated cohesionless soils are subject to a temporary but essentially total loss of shear strength under the reversing, cyclic shear stresses associated with earthquake shaking. As stated in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, “Liquefaction Evaluation” module dated January 2020, soil types that are susceptible to liquefaction are sand, silty sand, low plasticity (PI<7) silt and, in unusual cases, gravel. Rock and most clay soils are not liquefiable.

We evaluated the potential for liquefaction at the Project site using the available LOTB data. Results of the liquefaction potential analyses are presented in Appendix IV-2. Based on our evaluation, the liquefaction potential does not exist at the Project site. Hence, liquefaction is not expected to be considered in the geotechnical design for the Project.

Additional field explorations should be performed in the PS&E phase of the Project to confirm the liquefaction potential.

10.2.3 Seismic Slope Stability / Lateral Spreading Potential Seismic slope instability and lateral spreading potential of the proposed abutments seem not to be a design issue due to the nonexistent liquefaction potential at the Project site. Slope stability analyses of the proposed abutments will be performed when the final configuration of the approach walls and footing depths are determined by the structure designer and become available.

Seismic slope stability analyses will be performed to evaluate the overall stability at the proposed abutments and approach walls. The pseudo-static analysis will be performed with a horizontal seismic coefficient (kh) equal to 0.12g (1/2 × PGA) for pile supported structures and 0.08g (1/3 × PGA) for retaining walls on spread footings that can be considered as sliding walls.
353
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 9 ends

10.2.4 Tsunami
The Project site is located about 200 miles from the nearest coastline. Based on the above information and per MTD 20-13, a tsunami hazard does not exist at the site.

11.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

11.1 General
This report was prepared specifically for the proposed Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing over State Route 168 Project. Our preliminary design recommendations were developed based on the available as-built boring data at the Project site.

Additional explorations should be performed during the PS&E Phase of the Project to verify the recommendations.

11.2 Foundation Pile Selection
As discussed in Section 5.3, the subsoils at the Project site consist of alternating layers of very stiff to hard cohesive soils, and medium dense to dense granular soils. Groundwater is deep, conservatively assumed approximately 50 feet bgs (approximate Elev. 342.0 feet) for design purposes but is expected to be deeper during construction.

Based on the soil conditions, the most suitable foundation types are listed below:

Large Diameter Concrete-In-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) Shafts: Large diameter drilled shafts, those with diameters greater than 24 inches, are recommended for support. Caving and flowing soils may be expected at shallow depths; hence, temporary casing may be needed. The wet/slurry construction method may need to be considered for shaft installation. Preliminary “unfactored” axial capacities were computed for 100-foot-long CIDH piles with diameters varying between 24 and 96 inches. The CIDH pile length should be limited to 30 times the pile diameter to ensure constructability and quality per Caltrans Memo-To-Designers 3-1. For the vertical pile design, group effects need to be verified according to Table 10.8.3.6.3-1 of the California Amendments to the AASHTO LRFD BDS 8th Edition. The results of the analyses are presented in Appendix IV-3.

Driven Non-Displacement Piles: Driven non-displacement open-ended pipe piles are recommended due to the potential hard driving conditions through soil layers with high blow counts. H-piles are also feasible for foundation support, however installed pile lengths are expected to be variable and difficult to predict in these subsurface conditions.

Preliminary “unfactored” axial capacities were computed 100-foot long 16-inch-diameter (Caltrans Standard Alt. “W”) pipe piles. For the vertical pile design, group effects need to be verified according to Section 10.7.3.9 of AASHTO LRFD BDS 8th Edition. 354
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 10 ends

The results of the analyses are presented in Appendix IV-3. Note that driven piles may not be feasible if noise and vibration constraints exist.

The following assumptions were made during the axial pile capacity analyses:
• Existing Grade at Elev. 392.5 feet
• Pile Cut-Off at Elev. 388.5 feet
• We neglected the upper 10 feet of CIDH pile capacity assuming need for permanent casing for Type II shaft construction.
• We extended the last layer shown in Table 5 until Elev. 292.5 feet in order to evaluate 100-foot-long CIDH piles.

Additional field explorations and laboratory testing should be performed in the PS&E phase of the Project to confirm the axial capacities.

For preliminary cost estimation purposes, the lateral pile capacity can be evaluated based on the soil profile and strength parameters shown in Table 4.

Table 4 – Generalized Soil Profile and LPILE Parameters Elevation Soil Type (1, 2, 3)
(L-PILE Soil Type)
Probable
Soil Strength
Total Unit Weight (4)
(pcf) (ft) (ft)
392.5 388.5 Clayey Sand (SC)
(Sand, Reese) = 30 degrees 120
388.5 379.0 Clayey Sand (SC)
(Sand, Reese) = 38 degrees 120
379.0 357.0 Clayey Sand (SC)
(Sand, Reese) = 35 degrees 120
357.0 322.0 Sandy Silt (ML), Silty Sand (SM)
(Sand, Reese) = 32 degrees 120
322.0 309.5 Clayey Sand (SC), Silty Sand (SM)
(Sand, Reese) = 36 degrees 120
Notes:
(1) The upper 31 feet of the soil profile are based on soil borings ECB-1 and ECB-2, Enterprise Canal Box Culvert, Bridge No. 42-0422. Average existing grade at approximate Elev. 392.5 feet. (2) From 31 feet to end of exploration, the soil profile is based on soil borings TB-1 to TB-4, Temperance Expressway Undercrossing, Bridge No. 42-0410 L/R. Average existing grade at approximate Elev. 386.5 feet. (3) Soil type for each layer is the dominant soil type. Interbedded lenses of different materials can be found within each layer.
(4) Design groundwater at Elev. 342.5 feet. Effective unit weight (i.e., = total unit weight - 62.4 pcf) should be used below the groundwater level.
(5) For the lateral pile design, group effect will be accounted by applying a p-multiplier determined based on Table

10.7.2.4-1 of the California Amendments to the AASHTO LRFD BDS 8th Edition.

355
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 11 ends

The proposed pile foundation could impose additional lateral stress during seismic events that could impact the existing Enterprise Canal. We recommend the new piles to be located at a minimum distance of 8 times the pile diameter (8D) from the canal walls to minimize their impact in the canal. If this is not feasible, we recommend predilling the piles from the existing surface to approximately 5 feet below the existing culvert invert, and then drive the piles to the pile tip elevation. CIDH piles could also be constructed at the site.

Note that excavation and shoring are required for footing/pile cap construction regardless of the type of pile selected. In all cases (i.e., driven or CIDH piles) we recommend locating the pile cap below the existing culvert invert to minimize the development of passive loads on the canal.

Foundation type, global stability of the abutments, and mitigation measures, if needed, should be further evaluated during the PS&E phase of the Project based on the proposed configuration and the additional boring data.

12.0 ADDITIONAL FIELD WORK AND LABORATORY TESTING
The available site information does not provide adequate data to complete the design recommendations for the proposed Project.

Therefore, a field investigation consisting of nine (9) exploratory borings and laboratory testing should be considered to characterize the Project site, as described in Table 5.

Table 5 – Additional Field Explorations
Support ID. No. of Explorations Assumptions
Abutments 1 and 9
Bents 2 to 8
Nine (9) Soil Borings One (1) soil boring per support
Depth of boring= 120 feet
Notes:
(1) The penetration of Cone Penetration Tests (CPT)s may be limited because the as-built LOTBs indicate the presence of hard/dense soils. Depending on the boring data, some of the borings may be replaced with CPTs.

The actual number, depths, and locations of the soil borings and/or CPTs should be confirmed when the structural and foundation types have been determined. The exploration locations may be dictated by the utility conflict. Some of the borings may occur within Caltrans’s right-of- way, which will require an encroachment permit. We expect the explorations can be performed away from the traffic and traffic control may not be required. Drilling permits will be required from the Fresno County Environmental Health Agency and/or the City of Clovis.

356
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 12 ends

For foundation design of the proposed Project, laboratory tests may include Moisture Content (ASTM D2216), Unit Weight (ASTM D7263), Plasticity Index (AASHTO T 90), Liquid Limits (AASHTO T89), Particle-Size Distribution (ASTM D6913), Unconfined Compression (ASTM D2166), Unconsolidated-Undrained Triaxial (ASTM D2850), Consolidation (ASTM D2435), and Corrosivity (CTM 643, 422, and 417).

13.0 REPORT COPY LIST
This report will be transmitted to the prime designer, Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc., for further distribution.

14.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS
Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices and are based on our site reconnaissance and the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate from observed conditions. All work done is in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, of merchantability or fitness, is made or intended in connection with our work or by the furnishing of oral or written reports or findings.

The scope of our services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials in structures, soil, surface water, groundwater, or air, below or around this site.

Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by taking soil samples and excavating test borings; different soil conditions may require additional expenditures be made during construction to attain a properly constructed project. Some contingency fund is thus recommended to accommodate these possible extra costs.

This report has been prepared for the proposed Project as described earlier to support the structural design of the Project elements. In the event, any changes in the design or location of the facilities are planned, or if any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless the changes or variations are reviewed, and our recommendations modified or approved by us in writing.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the structure designer’s responsibility to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are incorporated into the Project and that necessary steps are also taken to see that the recommendations are carried out in the field.
357
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 13 ends

The findings in this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the subsurface conditions can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or to the works of man, on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur, whether they result from legislation or from the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings in this report might be invalidated, wholly or partially, by changes outside of our control.

Respectfully submitted,
PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC.

** DRAFT ** ** DRAFT **

Jorge Turbay, P.E. 73141 Y. David Wang, Ph.D., P.E. 52911 Senior Project Engineer Senior Engineer

358
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 14 ends

REFERENCES
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2017, “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications”, 8th Edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials, 2020, “Soil and Rock (I): D420 D5876”, ASTM Volume 04.08.

California Department of Transportation, “California Amendments (to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications – 8th Edition)”.

California Department of Transportation, “Caltrans ARS Online, v3.0.2” (https://arsonline.dot.ca.gov/).

California Department of Transportation, “Caltrans Fault Data Base (V2b)”.

California Department of Transportation, “Caltrans Test Methods”.

California Department of Transportation, 2018, “Corrosion Guidelines, Version 3.0”, Division of Engineering Services, Materials Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion and Structural Concrete Field Investigation Branch.

California Department of Transportation, “Geotechnical Manual” (https://dot.ca.gov/programs/engineering-services/manuals/geotechnical-manual).

California Department of Transportation, “Memo To Designers” (https://dot.ca.gov/programs/engineering-services/manuals/memo-to-designers).

California Department of Transportation, 2012, “Methodology for Developing Design Response Spectrum for Use in Seismic Design Recommendations”.

California Department of Transportation, 2018, “Standard Plans”.

California Department of Transportation, 2018, “Standard Specifications”.

Department of the Navy, Navy Facilities Engineering Command, May 1982, Soil Mechanics, Design Manual 7.1.

Department of the Navy, Navy Facilities Engineering Command, May 1982, “Foundation and Earth Structures”, Design Manual 7.2.

Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R. W., 2008, “Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes”, EERI Monograph

12. Kings Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies, Groundwater Sustainability Annual Report, April 2021.

359
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Draft SPGR – Enterprise Canal Trail Pedestrian Overcrossing Over State Route 168 Job No.: 2019-137-FDN
January 18, 2023

Page 15 ends

Lambe, T.W. and Whitman, R.V., 1969, Soil Mechanics.

Mathews, R.A., and Burnett, J.L., 1965. Geologic Map of California, Fresno Sheet. California Division of Mines and Geology.

State of California, 2020. Tsunami Hazard Area, Sonoma County; produced by the California Geological Survey and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services; dated 2021.

Terzaghi, K., Peck, R.B., and Mesri, G. 1996, “Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice”, 3rd edition, Wiley Interscience Publication.

Tokimatsu, K, and Seed, H.B., 1987, “Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking”.

United States Geological Survey and California Geological Survey, 2006. “Quaternary fault and fold database for the United States.” Accessed April 28, 2019. (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/).
360
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix III SITE MAP
Plate 1: Project Location Map
Plate 2: Geologic Map
Plate 4: Fault Map
Plate 5: Recommended Response Spectrum
361
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
0 1
Miles
Project Location
Scale: 1:24,000
Map Location

ENTERPRISE CANAL TRAIL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING
OVER STATE ROUTE 168 PROJECT

CITY OF CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NO: 2019-137-FDN
PLATE: 1

PROJECT LOCATION MAP
362
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Grg
Grg
Ms
Qc
Qc
Qc
Qc
Qc
Qc
Mv
Qc
Qc
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Jefferson Canal
Friant-K
ern Can
al
Helm
Colonial Ditch
Dawson Ditch
EnterpriseCanal
Clovis Ditch
West Branch Clovis Ditch Dog
Creek
Friant-KernCanal
McFar
lane Ditch
Dry Creek
0 12,000
Feet GEOLOGIC MAP
Project Location
Map
Location
Scale: 1:62,500
Fresno
County
Legend

GEOLOGICAL DATA SOURCE
Mathews & Burnett, 1965. Geologic Map of California, Fresno Sheet. California Division of Mines and Geology.

Jurassic, Creataceous - Granodiorite
Pre-Cretaceous - Meta-volcanic rocks
Pre-Cretaceous - Meta-sedimentary rocks
Pleistocene - Non-marine sedimentary deposits
Holocene - Alluvial fan deposits
Grg
Mv
Ms
Qc
Qf
SR 168

ENTERPRISE CANAL TRAIL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING
OVER STATE ROUTE 168 PROJECT

CITY OF CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NO: 2019-137-FDN
PLATE: 2
363
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

FAULT MAP
0 30
Miles
Scale: 1:1,100,000

MAP LOCATION
California
USGS & CGS. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database
for the United States. Accessed 11/11/2021.

Fault data source:

Legend
Fault trace
Fault name
Cascade
Historic <150 yrs
Latest Quaternary <15,000 yrs
60 mile radius
60 mile radius
San Andreas - Creeping Section
Nunez
Project Location
Quaternary <1.6 million yrs
Great V. 13
Great V. 14

ENTERPRISE CANAL TRAIL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING
OVER STATE ROUTE 168 PROJECT

CITY OF CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NO: 2019-137-FDN
PLATE: 3
364
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Site Information Recommended Response Spectrum
Latitude: 36.84538
Longitude -119.65925
VS30 (m/s) = 233 0.0 0.24 1 1 0.24
Mean Magnitude 0.1 0.44 1 1 0.44
(for PGA) = 6.29 0.2 0.61 1 1 0.61

0.3 0.65 1 1 0.65

0.5 0.6 1 1 0.60

86.8 0.75 0.48 1 1 0.48

1.0 0.38 1 1 0.38

2.0 0.2 1 1 0.20

3.0 0.13 1 1 0.13

4.0 0.09 1 1 0.09

5.0 0.07 1 1 0.07
Source:

1. Caltrans ARS Online tool (V.3.0.2, https://arsonline.dot.ca.gov/)

2. USGS Unified Hazard Tool (https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/) JOB NO.: 2019-137-FDN
Mean Site-Source
Distance (km, for
Sa at 1s) =
Period
(sec)
Spectral
Acceleration
(2014) (g)
Adjusted for Near
Fault Effect
Adjusted For
Basin Effect
Design Spectral
Acceleration
(2014) (g)
PLATE: 4

3. Caltrans SDC 2.0 was adopted September 1, 2019. Design Spectrum is based on the USGS 975 year uniform hazard spectrum only.

ENTERPRISE CANAL TRAIL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING OVER
STATE ROUTE 168 PROJECT

CITY OF CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA

0.0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Acceleration, Sa (g)
Period (sec)

RECOMMENDED ACCELERATION RESPONSE SPECTRUM
(5% Damping)
365
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix III GROUND MOTION DATA SHEET
366
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

ARS Online V3.0.2
Using the tool: Specify latitude and longitude in decimal degrees in the input boxes below. Alternatively, Google Maps can be used to find the site location. Specify the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the upper 30m (Vs30) in the input box. After submitting the data, the USGS 2014 hazard data for a 975-year return period will be reported along with adjustment factors required by Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC) V2.0.

Latitude: 36.84538 Longitude: -119.65925 Vs30 (m/s): 233 Submit Caltrans Design Spectrum (5% damping)
Period(s) Sa2008(g) Sa2014(g) Basin2008 Basin2014 Near Fault Amp Design Sa2008(g) Design Sa2014(g) PGA 0.22 0.24 1 1 1 0.22 0.24

0.10 0.38 0.44 1 1 1 0.38 0.44

0.20 0.49 0.61 1 1 1 0.49 0.61

0.30 0.5 0.65 1 1 1 0.5 0.65

0.50 0.43 0.6 1 1 1 0.43 0.6

0.75 0.36 0.48 1 1 1 0.36 0.48

1.0 0.3 0.38 1 1 1 0.3 0.38

2.0 0.18 0.2 1 1 1 0.18 0.2

3.0 0.12 0.13 1 1 1 0.12 0.13

4.0 0.08 0.09 1 1 1 0.08 0.09

5.0 0.07 0.07 1 1 1 0.07 0.07
Copy table
Deaggregation (based on 2014 hazard)
mean magnitude (for PGA) 6.29
mean site-source distance (km, for Sa at 1s) 86.8
Option: recalculate Near Fault amplification with user specified distance Site-source distance (km): 86.8 Update
367
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix III-A LOG OF TEST BORINGS (LOTBs)
368
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

ENTERPRISE CANAL TRAIL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING OVER STATE ROUTE 168 PROJECT

CITY OF CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NO.: 2019-137-FDN
Approximate Project Location
369
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
370
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

NOTES: 1. Bench mork - Coltrons project control point
FRE-168. 168-18. locoted 0.86 km west of
the intersection of Bullord and Villo Avenues
ond opproximotely 15m south of centerlin of
Bullord Avenue. at on elevation of 106.85 m.

2. Ground woter was not encountered within the
depths of exploration.

3. Hommer type - Rope & cotheod with o

0.62 kN safety drop hammer.
1 : 1000
SILTY SAND (SM>, Mediun dense l1 SILTY SAND (SM), Loose red gray red brown nuist, some clay noist, ninor roots ... Mediun dense clay seans
... Slight plasticity, trace of fine
SANDY CLAY (CL) Hard ellow
brown noist, 'sone sxt CLAYEY SAND (SC), Mediun dense
red gray noist, fine to nediun gr-alned
... Very dense SANDY SILT (ML), Hard yellow
brown noist, fine grained
NDY SILT (ML), Hard yellow brown
noist, noderately cenented
... Very dense
... Very dense
SILTY SAND (SM), Dense dark
brown with sone cloy CLAYEY SAND (SC); Very dense
red brown noist, nediun to
coarse rained, weakl
cenente%, slight plaS'!iCity
6-11-97
VERTICAL 1 : 100 ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN
HORIZONTAL 1 : 200
371
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix III-B AVAILABLE PLANS
372
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
373
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
374
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
375
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
376
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
377
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix IVI CALCULATIONS PACKAGE
Appendix IV-1: Strength Parameters & Vs30 Calculation
Appendix IV-2: Liquefaction Potential Analyses
Appendix IV-3: Axial Pile Capacity Analyses
378
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

IV-1: Strength Parameters & Vs30 Calculation
379
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

6. The estimated Vs were correlated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Design Acceleration Response Spectrum" module (January 2021). (CR, CB & CS Corr.)
Correlated Strength Parameters
Lab Su (psf) Vs (m/s)CE
N60
CE Corr. CN (N1)60 CR CS CB F.C. (N1)60,CSSample No
Layer Thickness (ft) Sample
Depth
(ft)
USCS
Type
Soil
Type SPT-N eq.Field Blow
Count Sampler Type Unit Weight
(pcf) sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
380
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

SOIL PARAMETERS & Vs30 Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary BORING NO.: TB-1 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.5 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) Nd 31.1 Vsd (m/s) 225 GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y N30 34.2 Vs30 (m/s) 247 ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P) f (°) Su (psf) Sr (psf)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 17 MC 124.9 250 250 7.0 1.17 8.1 1.70 13.8 0.75 1.00 1.05 6.4 10.9 10.9 31.2 #N/A 81 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 49 MC 124.9 874 874 20.1 1.17 23.4 1.56 36.5 0.80 1.00 1.05 19.7 30.6 30.6 36.0 #N/A 141 3 9.5 14 12 SM 1 Q 36 SPT 124.9 1,499 1,499 36.0 1.17 42.0 1.19 49.9 0.85 1.20 1.05 45.0 53.4 53.4 38.0 #N/A 192 4 14 18.5 17 CL 2 Q 48 MC 135.6 2,155 2,155 31.2 1.17 36.4 0.99 36.1 0.95 1.00 1.05 36.3 36.0 #N/A 4,550 211 5 18.5 24.5 22 SM 1 Q 32 SPT 125.7 2,799 2,799 32.0 1.17 37.3 0.87 32.5 0.95 1.20 1.05 44.7 38.9 38.9 35.4 #N/A 222 6 24.5 28.5 27 SM 1 Q 70 MC 125.7 3,427 3,427 28.7 1.17 33.5 0.79 26.3 1.00 1.00 1.05 35.2 27.6 27.6 34.2 #N/A 220 7 28.5 34.5 32 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 144.4 4,121 4,121 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.72 33.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 42.1 42.1 36.0 #N/A 282 8 34.5 39.5 37 ML 1 Q 82 MC 144.4 4,843 4,843 33.6 1.17 39.2 0.66 25.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 41.2 27.2 27.2 34.7 #N/A 279 9 39.5 44.5 42 ML 1 Q 47 SPT 123 5,512 5,512 47.0 1.17 54.8 0.62 34.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 69.1 42.8 42.8 36.1 #N/A 318 10 44.5 49.5 47 ML 1 Q 95 MC 123 6,127 6,127 39.0 1.17 45.4 0.59 26.7 1.00 1.00 1.05 47.7 28.0 28.0 34.8 #N/A 309 11 49.5 54.5 52 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 123 6,742 6,617 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.57 26.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 33.3 33.3 34.8 #N/A 328 12 54.5 59.5 57 ML 1 Q 100 MC 115.6 7,338 6,901 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.55 26.5 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 27.8 27.8 34.8 #N/A 324 13 59.5 64.5 62 ML 1 Q 34 SPT 115.6 7,916 7,167 34.0 1.17 39.7 0.54 21.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 50.0 27.2 27.2 33.7 #N/A 327 14 64.5 69.5 67 SM 1 Q 36 MC 119.6 8,504 7,443 14.8 1.17 17.2 0.53 9.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 18.1 9.6 9.6 29.6 #N/A 226 15 69.5 75 72 SM 1 Q 78 SPT 119.6 9,102 7,729 78.0 1.17 91.0 0.52 47.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 114.7 60.0 60.0 37.7 #N/A 348 16 75 77 77 SC 1 Q 113 MC 119.6 9,700 8,015 46.3 1.17 54.1 0.51 27.8 1.00 1.00 1.05 56.8 29.2 29.2 34.5 #N/A 298 #N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

6. The estimated Vs were correlated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Design Acceleration Response Spectrum" module (January 2021).

Sample No
Layer Thickness (ft) Sample
Depth
(ft)
USCS
Type
Soil
Type SPT-N eq.Field Blow
Count Sampler Type Unit Weight
(pcf) sv (psf) sv' (psf) CE
N60
CE Corr. CN (N1)60 CR CS CB F.C. (N1)60,CS
(CR, CB & CS Corr.)
Correlated Strength Parameters
Lab Su (psf) Vs (m/s)
Ver. 2021-04-07
382
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

SOIL PARAMETERS & Vs30 Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary BORING NO.: TB-2 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.9 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) Nd 36.7 Vsd (m/s) 241 GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y N30 40.3 Vs30 (m/s) 265 ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P) f (°) Su (psf) Sr (psf)
1 0 4 2 SM 1 Q 34 MC 133.9 268 268 13.9 1.17 16.3 1.70 27.6 0.75 1.00 1.05 12.8 21.8 21.8 34.5 #N/A 97 2 4 8.5 6 SM 1 Q 26 SPT 133.9 803 803 26.0 1.17 30.3 1.62 49.2 0.80 1.20 1.05 30.6 49.6 49.6 37.9 #N/A 153 3 8.5 13.5 11 SM 1 Q 44 MC 120 1,438 1,438 18.0 1.17 21.0 1.21 25.5 0.85 1.00 1.05 18.8 22.8 22.8 34.1 #N/A 156 4 13.5 18.5 16 ML 1 Q 39 SPT 134.7 2,075 2,075 39.0 1.17 45.5 1.01 46.0 0.95 1.20 1.05 54.5 55.0 55.0 37.9 #N/A 223 5 18.5 23.5 21 ML 1 Q 62 MC 134.7 2,748 2,748 25.4 1.17 29.7 0.88 26.0 0.95 1.00 1.05 29.6 26.0 26.0 34.7 #N/A 220 6 23.5 28.5 26 ML 1 Q 52 SPT 133.9 3,420 3,420 52.0 1.17 60.7 0.79 47.7 1.00 1.20 1.05 76.4 60.1 60.1 38.2 #N/A 278 7 28.5 33.5 31 ML 1 Q 52 MC 133.9 4,089 4,089 21.3 1.17 24.9 0.72 17.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 26.1 18.8 18.8 32.9 #N/A 245 8 33.5 38.5 36 ML 1 Q 77 SPT 136.6 4,766 4,766 77.0 1.17 89.8 0.67 59.9 1.00 1.20 1.05 113.2 75.4 75.4 39.6 #N/A 330 9 38.5 43.5 41 ML 1 Q 98 MC 133.6 5,441 5,441 40.2 1.17 46.9 0.62 29.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 49.2 30.7 30.7 35.3 #N/A 299 10 43.5 48.5 46 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 133.6 6,109 6,109 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.59 27.5 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 34.6 34.6 35.0 #N/A 320 11 48.5 53.5 51 ML 1 Q 100 MC 133.6 6,777 6,715 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.56 26.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 28.2 28.2 34.9 #N/A 321 12 53.5 58.5 56 ML 1 Q 50 SPT 133.6 7,445 7,071 50.0 1.17 58.3 0.55 31.9 1.00 1.20 1.05 73.5 40.2 40.2 35.8 #N/A 348 13 58.5 63.5 61 ML 1 Q 40 MC 133.6 8,113 7,427 16.4 1.17 19.1 0.53 10.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 20.1 10.7 10.7 30.5 #N/A 284 14 63.5 69 66 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 133.6 8,781 7,783 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.52 24.3 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 30.7 30.7 34.3 #N/A 346 15 69 73.5 71 CL 2 Q 91 MC 134 9,450 8,140 59.2 1.17 69.0 0.51 35.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 72.5 36.9 #N/A 8,626 363 16 73.5 77 76 ML 1 Q 44 SPT 134 10,120 8,498 44.0 1.17 51.3 0.50 25.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 64.7 32.3 32.3 34.6 #N/A 361 #N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

SOIL PARAMETERS & Vs30 Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary BORING NO.: TB-3 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.4 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) Nd 36.4 Vsd (m/s) 224 GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y N30 40.0 Vs30 (m/s) 246 ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P) f (°) Su (psf) Sr (psf)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 75 MC 135.7 271 271 30.8 1.17 35.9 1.70 61.0 0.75 1.00 1.05 28.3 48.0 48.0 39.2 #N/A 117 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 31 MC 136.8 953 953 12.7 1.17 14.8 1.49 22.1 0.80 1.00 1.05 12.5 18.6 18.6 33.4 #N/A 129 3 9.5 14.5 12 SM 1 Q 28 SPT 130.3 1,620 1,620 28.0 1.17 32.7 1.14 37.3 0.85 1.20 1.05 35.0 40.0 40.0 36.2 #N/A 185 4 14.5 19.5 17 SM 1 Q 39 MC 130.3 2,272 2,272 16.0 1.17 18.7 0.97 18.0 0.95 1.00 1.05 18.6 18.0 18.0 32.4 #N/A 173 5 19.5 24.5 22 SM 1 Q 24 SPT 128.7 2,919 2,919 24.0 1.17 28.0 0.85 23.8 0.95 1.20 1.05 33.5 28.5 28.5 33.7 #N/A 210 6 24.5 29.5 27 SM 1 Q 86 MC 128.7 3,563 3,563 35.3 1.17 41.1 0.77 31.7 1.00 1.00 1.05 43.2 33.3 33.3 35.2 #N/A 233 7 29.5 34.5 32 SM 1 Q 64 SPT 110.9 4,162 4,162 64.0 1.17 74.7 0.71 53.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 94.1 67.1 67.1 38.4 #N/A 288 8 34.5 39.5 37 SM 1 Q 100 MC 110.9 4,716 4,716 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.67 32.0 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 33.6 33.6 35.3 #N/A 257 9 39.5 44.5 42 SM 1 Q 19 SPT 110.9 5,271 5,271 19.0 1.17 22.2 0.63 14.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 27.9 17.7 17.7 31.3 #N/A 230 10 44.5 49.5 47 SM 1 Q 100 MC 122.4 5,854 5,854 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.60 28.8 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 30.2 30.2 34.7 #N/A 270 11 49.5 53 52 SM 1 Q 100 SPT 122.4 6,466 6,341 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.58 67.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 84.9 84.9 39.7 #N/A 352 12 53 58.5 57 CL 2 Q 48 MC 132.1 7,117 6,680 31.2 1.17 36.4 0.56 20.5 1.00 1.00 1.05 38.2 21.5 #N/A 4,550 306 13 58.5 64.5 62 SC 1 Q 50 SPT 132.1 7,777 7,029 50.0 1.17 58.3 0.55 32.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 73.5 40.3 40.3 35.3 #N/A 307 14 64.5 69.5 67 SC 1 Q 90 MC 132.1 8,438 7,377 36.9 1.17 43.1 0.54 23.1 1.00 1.00 1.05 45.2 24.2 24.2 33.6 #N/A 278 15 69.5 74.5 72 SC 1 Q 100 SPT 132.1 9,098 7,726 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.52 61.1 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 76.9 76.9 39.2 #N/A 368 16 74.5 77 77 SC 1 Q 95 MC 132.1 9,759 8,074 39.0 1.17 45.4 0.51 23.3 1.00 1.00 1.05 47.7 24.4 24.4 33.6 #N/A 287 #N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

SOIL PARAMETERS & Vs30 Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary BORING NO.: TB-4 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.6 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) Nd 19.4 Vsd (m/s) 205 GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y N30 21.3 Vs30 (m/s) 226 ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P) f (°) Su (psf) Sr (psf)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 7 MC 135.7 271 271 2.9 1.17 3.3 1.70 5.7 0.75 1.00 1.05 2.6 4.5 4.5 28.1 #N/A 68 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 12 SPT 136.8 953 953 12.0 1.17 14.0 1.49 20.9 0.80 1.20 1.05 14.1 21.0 21.0 33.1 #N/A 133 3 9.5 14.5 12 SM 1 Q 22 MC 130.3 1,620 1,620 9.0 1.17 10.5 1.14 12.0 0.85 1.00 1.05 9.4 10.7 10.7 30.6 #N/A 137 4 14.5 17 17 SM 1 Q 19 SPT 130.3 2,272 2,272 19.0 1.17 22.2 0.97 21.4 0.95 1.20 1.05 26.5 25.6 25.6 33.2 #N/A 187 5 17 24.5 22 SC 1 Q 48 MC 128.7 2,915 2,915 19.7 1.17 23.0 0.85 19.6 0.95 1.00 1.05 22.9 19.5 19.5 32.8 #N/A 192 6 24.5 29.5 27 SC 1 Q 28 SPT 128.7 3,559 3,559 28.0 1.17 32.7 0.77 25.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 41.2 31.7 31.7 34.0 #N/A 230 7 29.5 34.5 32 SC 1 Q 100 MC 110.9 4,158 4,158 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.71 34.1 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 35.8 35.8 35.7 #N/A 250 8 34.5 39.5 37 ML 1 Q 41 SPT 110.9 4,712 4,712 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.67 32.1 1.00 1.20 1.05 60.3 40.4 40.4 35.8 #N/A 296 9 39.5 44.5 42 ML 1 Q 68 MC 110.9 5,267 5,267 27.9 1.17 32.5 0.63 20.6 1.00 1.00 1.05 34.2 21.6 21.6 33.5 #N/A 278 10 44.5 49.5 47 ML 1 Q 100 SPT 122.4 5,850 5,850 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.60 70.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 88.4 88.4 40.3 #N/A 369 11 49.5 51.5 52 ML 1 Q 100 MC 122.4 6,462 6,337 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.58 27.6 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 29.0 29.0 35.0 #N/A 315 12 51.5 59.5 57 SM 1 Q 35 SPT 132.1 7,128 6,691 35.0 1.17 40.8 0.56 23.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 51.5 28.9 28.9 33.6 #N/A 280 13 59.5 65 62 SM 1 Q 100 MC 132.1 7,788 7,039 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.55 26.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 27.5 27.5 34.2 #N/A 282 14 65 69.5 67 SC 1 Q 71 SPT 132.1 8,449 7,388 71.0 1.17 82.8 0.54 44.3 1.00 1.20 1.05 104.4 55.9 55.9 37.2 #N/A 337 15 69.5 74.5 72 SC 1 Q 100 MC 132.1 9,109 7,736 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.52 25.0 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 26.3 26.3 34.0 #N/A 288 16 74.5 77 77 ML 1 Q 100 SPT 132.1 9,770 8,085 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.51 59.7 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 75.2 75.2 39.6 #N/A 409 #N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
#N/A #N/A
Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and C S (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For fine-grained materials, the correlated undrained shear strengths are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

4. The friction angles were estimated based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021).

5. Residual Strength (Sr) is based on Kramer and Wang (2015) as suggested in the Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading" module (January 2020).

IV-2: Liquefaction Potential Analyses
386
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

4. The influence of Fines Contents are expressed by the following correction: (N1)60cs = a + b (N1)60 where a and b = coefficients determined from the following relationships for FC < 5% a = 0, b = 1.0 for 5% < FC < 35% a = exp(1.76-(190/FC2)), b = (0.99+(FC1.5/1000)) for FC > 35% a = 5.0, b = 1.2

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

6. Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Youd, et al., ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, October 2001, Vol. 127 No. 10

7. Volumetric Strain of Liquefied Soil ais based on Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) (CR, CB & CS Corr.)
FS Vol. Strain
(%) DD (in)rd CSR Ks Dr f Kasv'CE
N60
CE Corr. CN (N1)60 CR CS CB F.C. (N1)60,CS CRR7.5 svSample No Layer Thickness (ft) Sample
Depth
(ft)
USCS
Type
Soil
Type SPT-N eq.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
387
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
388
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) MAJOR CUT(-)/FILL(+) (ft) a max (g)= 0.24 PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene DESIGN GW DEPTH (ft) 50 FAULT M w = 6.29 STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary MAXIMUM LIQ. DEPTH CONSIDERED (ft) 70 BORING NO.: TB-1 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene MSF = 1.57 BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.5 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y
ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 17 MC 124.9 250 250 7.0 1.17 8.1 1.70 13.8 0.75 1.00 1.05 6.4 10.9 10.9 249.8 249.8 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.7 0.7 1.0 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 49 MC 124.9 874 874 20.1 1.17 23.4 1.56 36.5 0.80 1.00 1.05 19.7 30.6 30.6 874.3 874.3 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.9 0.6 1.0 3 9.5 14 12 SM 1 Q 36 SPT 124.9 1,499 1,499 36.0 1.17 42.0 1.19 49.9 0.85 1.20 1.05 45.0 53.4 53.4 1498.8 1498.8 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.1 0.6 1.0 4 14 18.5 17 CL 2 Q 48 MC 135.6 2,155 2,155 31.2 1.17 36.4 0.99 36.1 0.95 1.00 1.05 36.3 36.0 2305.2 2305.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 5 18.5 24.5 22 SM 1 Q 32 SPT 125.7 2,799 2,799 32.0 1.17 37.3 0.87 32.5 0.95 1.20 1.05 44.7 38.9 38.9 2765.4 2765.4 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.6 1.0 6 24.5 28.5 27 SM 1 Q 70 MC 125.7 3,427 3,427 28.7 1.17 33.5 0.79 26.3 1.00 1.00 1.05 35.2 27.6 27.6 3393.9 3393.9 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.6 1.0 7 28.5 34.5 32 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 144.4 4,121 4,121 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.72 33.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 42.1 42.1 4620.8 4620.8 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.6 1.0 8 34.5 39.5 37 ML 1 Q 82 MC 144.4 4,843 4,843 33.6 1.17 39.2 0.66 25.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 41.2 27.2 27.2 5342.8 5342.8 0.9 0.1 0.7 0.8 0.6 1.0 9 39.5 44.5 42 ML 1 Q 47 SPT 123 5,512 5,512 47.0 1.17 54.8 0.62 34.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 69.1 42.8 42.8 5166.0 5166.0 0.8 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.6 1.0 10 44.5 49.5 47 ML 1 Q 95 MC 123 6,127 6,127 39.0 1.17 45.4 0.59 26.7 1.00 1.00 1.05 47.7 28.0 28.0 5781.0 5781.0 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 1.0 11 49.5 54.5 52 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 123 6,742 6,617 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.57 26.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 33.3 33.3 6396.0 6271.2 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 12 54.5 59.5 57 ML 1 Q 100 MC 115.6 7,338 6,901 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.55 26.5 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 27.8 27.8 0.36 6589.2 6152.4 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 3.10 13 59.5 64.5 62 ML 1 Q 34 SPT 115.6 7,916 7,167 34.0 1.17 39.7 0.54 21.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 50.0 27.2 27.2 0.34 7167.2 6418.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 2.94 14 64.5 69.5 67 SM 1 Q 36 MC 119.6 8,504 7,443 14.8 1.17 17.2 0.53 9.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 18.1 9.6 9.6 0.11 8013.2 6952.4 0.6 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.09 15 69.5 75 72 SM 1 Q 78 SPT 119.6 9,102 7,729 78.0 1.17 91.0 0.52 47.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 114.7 60.0 60.0 8611.2 7238.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 16 75 77 77 SC 1 Q 113 MC 119.6 9,700 8,015 46.3 1.17 54.1 0.51 27.8 1.00 1.00 1.05 56.8 29.2 29.2 0.42 9209.2 7524.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 3.61 Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

7. Volumetric Strain of Liquefied Soil ais based on Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) Sample No
Layer Thickness (ft) Sample
Depth
(ft)
USCS
Type
Soil
Type SPT-N eq.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf) sv'CE
N60
CE Corr. CN (N1)60 CR CS CB F.C. (N1)60,CS CRR7.5 sv CSR Ks Dr f Ka (CR, CB & CS Corr.)
FS Vol. Strain
(%) DD (in)rd
Ver. 2021-04-07
389
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) MAJOR CUT(-)/FILL(+) (ft) a max (g)= 0.24 PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene DESIGN GW DEPTH (ft) 50 FAULT M w = 6.29 STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary MAXIMUM LIQ. DEPTH CONSIDERED (ft) 70 BORING NO.: TB-2 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene MSF = 1.57 BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.9 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y
ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P)
1 0 4 2 SM 1 Q 34 MC 133.9 268 268 13.9 1.17 16.3 1.70 27.6 0.75 1.00 1.05 12.8 21.8 21.8 267.8 267.8 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 2 4 8.5 6 SM 1 Q 26 SPT 133.9 803 803 26.0 1.17 30.3 1.62 49.2 0.80 1.20 1.05 30.6 49.6 49.6 803.4 803.4 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 3 8.5 13.5 11 SM 1 Q 44 MC 120 1,438 1,438 18.0 1.17 21.0 1.21 25.5 0.85 1.00 1.05 18.8 22.8 22.8 1320.0 1320.0 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 4 13.5 18.5 16 ML 1 Q 39 SPT 134.7 2,075 2,075 39.0 1.17 45.5 1.01 46.0 0.95 1.20 1.05 54.5 55.0 55.0 2155.2 2155.2 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.1 0.6 1.0 5 18.5 23.5 21 ML 1 Q 62 MC 134.7 2,748 2,748 25.4 1.17 29.7 0.88 26.0 0.95 1.00 1.05 29.6 26.0 26.0 2828.7 2828.7 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.6 1.0 6 23.5 28.5 26 ML 1 Q 52 SPT 133.9 3,420 3,420 52.0 1.17 60.7 0.79 47.7 1.00 1.20 1.05 76.4 60.1 60.1 3481.4 3481.4 0.9 0.1 0.8 1.1 0.6 1.0 7 28.5 33.5 31 ML 1 Q 52 MC 133.9 4,089 4,089 21.3 1.17 24.9 0.72 17.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 26.1 18.8 18.8 4150.9 4150.9 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.7 0.6 1.0 8 33.5 38.5 36 ML 1 Q 77 SPT 136.6 4,766 4,766 77.0 1.17 89.8 0.67 59.9 1.00 1.20 1.05 113.2 75.4 75.4 4917.6 4917.6 0.9 0.1 0.7 1.2 0.6 1.0 9 38.5 43.5 41 ML 1 Q 98 MC 133.6 5,441 5,441 40.2 1.17 46.9 0.62 29.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 49.2 30.7 30.7 5477.6 5477.6 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 1.0 10 43.5 48.5 46 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 133.6 6,109 6,109 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.59 27.5 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 34.6 34.6 6145.6 6145.6 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 1.0 11 48.5 53.5 51 ML 1 Q 100 MC 133.6 6,777 6,715 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.56 26.9 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 28.2 28.2 0.38 6813.6 6751.2 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 3.18 12 53.5 58.5 56 ML 1 Q 50 SPT 133.6 7,445 7,071 50.0 1.17 58.3 0.55 31.9 1.00 1.20 1.05 73.5 40.2 40.2 7481.6 7107.2 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 13 58.5 63.5 61 ML 1 Q 40 MC 133.6 8,113 7,427 16.4 1.17 19.1 0.53 10.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 20.1 10.7 10.7 0.12 8149.6 7463.2 0.7 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.17 14 63.5 69 66 ML 1 Q 40 SPT 133.6 8,781 7,783 40.0 1.17 46.7 0.52 24.3 1.00 1.20 1.05 58.8 30.7 30.7 8817.6 7819.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 15 69 73.5 71 CL 2 Q 91 MC 134 9,450 8,140 59.2 1.17 69.0 0.51 35.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 72.5 36.9 9514.0 8203.6 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 16 73.5 77 76 ML 1 Q 44 SPT 134 10,120 8,498 44.0 1.17 51.3 0.50 25.6 1.00 1.20 1.05 64.7 32.3 32.3 10184.0 8561.6 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ.

Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
390
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) MAJOR CUT(-)/FILL(+) (ft) a max (g)= 0.24 PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene DESIGN GW DEPTH (ft) 50 FAULT M w = 6.29 STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary MAXIMUM LIQ. DEPTH CONSIDERED (ft) 70 BORING NO.: TB-3 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene MSF = 1.57 BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.4 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y
ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 75 MC 135.7 271 271 30.8 1.17 35.9 1.70 61.0 0.75 1.00 1.05 28.3 48.0 48.0 271.4 271.4 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.1 0.6 1.0 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 31 MC 136.8 953 953 12.7 1.17 14.8 1.49 22.1 0.80 1.00 1.05 12.5 18.6 18.6 957.6 957.6 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 3 9.5 14.5 12 SM 1 Q 28 SPT 130.3 1,620 1,620 28.0 1.17 32.7 1.14 37.3 0.85 1.20 1.05 35.0 40.0 40.0 1563.6 1563.6 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 4 14.5 19.5 17 SM 1 Q 39 MC 130.3 2,272 2,272 16.0 1.17 18.7 0.97 18.0 0.95 1.00 1.05 18.6 18.0 18.0 2215.1 2215.1 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 5 19.5 24.5 22 SM 1 Q 24 SPT 128.7 2,919 2,919 24.0 1.17 28.0 0.85 23.8 0.95 1.20 1.05 33.5 28.5 28.5 2831.4 2831.4 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 1.0 6 24.5 29.5 27 SM 1 Q 86 MC 128.7 3,563 3,563 35.3 1.17 41.1 0.77 31.7 1.00 1.00 1.05 43.2 33.3 33.3 3474.9 3474.9 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.6 1.0 7 29.5 34.5 32 SM 1 Q 64 SPT 110.9 4,162 4,162 64.0 1.17 74.7 0.71 53.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 94.1 67.1 67.1 3548.8 3548.8 0.9 0.1 0.8 1.2 0.6 1.0 8 34.5 39.5 37 SM 1 Q 100 MC 110.9 4,716 4,716 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.67 32.0 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 33.6 33.6 4103.3 4103.3 0.9 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.6 1.0 9 39.5 44.5 42 SM 1 Q 19 SPT 110.9 5,271 5,271 19.0 1.17 22.2 0.63 14.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 27.9 17.7 17.7 4657.8 4657.8 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.0 10 44.5 49.5 47 SM 1 Q 100 MC 122.4 5,854 5,854 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.60 28.8 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 30.2 30.2 5752.8 5752.8 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 1.0 11 49.5 53 52 SM 1 Q 100 SPT 122.4 6,466 6,341 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.58 67.4 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 84.9 84.9 6364.8 6240.0 0.7 0.1 0.6 1.2 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 12 53 58.5 57 CL 2 Q 48 MC 132.1 7,117 6,680 31.2 1.17 36.4 0.56 20.5 1.00 1.00 1.05 38.2 21.5 7529.7 7092.9 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 13 58.5 64.5 62 SC 1 Q 50 SPT 132.1 7,777 7,029 50.0 1.17 58.3 0.55 32.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 73.5 40.3 40.3 8190.2 7441.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 14 64.5 69.5 67 SC 1 Q 90 MC 132.1 8,438 7,377 36.9 1.17 43.1 0.54 23.1 1.00 1.00 1.05 45.2 24.2 24.2 0.28 8850.7 7789.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 2.46 15 69.5 74.5 72 SC 1 Q 100 SPT 132.1 9,098 7,726 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.52 61.1 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 76.9 76.9 9511.2 8138.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 16 74.5 77 77 SC 1 Q 95 MC 132.1 9,759 8,074 39.0 1.17 45.4 0.51 23.3 1.00 1.00 1.05 47.7 24.4 24.4 0.28 10171.7 8486.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 2.49 Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
391
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Calc By: JT
Date: 10/10/22
PROJECT NAME: Enterprise Canal Trail POC over 168 Soil Groups Age Scaling Factor (ASF, Dimensionless) MAJOR CUT(-)/FILL(+) (ft) a max (g)= 0.24 PROJECT NO.: 2019-137-FDN 1. Cohesionless Materials (SC, SM, SP, SW, GP, & GW, ML) H: Holocene DESIGN GW DEPTH (ft) 50 FAULT M w = 6.29 STRUCTURE: Temperance Expressway Undercrossing 2. Cohesive Materials (CL, CH, ML, MH, OL, & OH, SC, GC) Q: Quaternary MAXIMUM LIQ. DEPTH CONSIDERED (ft) 70 BORING NO.: TB-4 3. Liquefiable Soils (Residual Shear Strength, Sr) P: Pleistocene MSF = 1.57 BORING ELEV. (ft): 386.6 4. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesionless) BOREHOLE DIA (in)= 6 HAMMER ENERGY = 70% 5. Young Sedimentary Rocks (Cohesive) GW DEPTH (ft)= 50 DRILLING RODS (Y/N)= Y
ASF N60 (N1)60
from to (H/Q/P)
1 0 4.5 2 SM 1 Q 7 MC 135.7 271 271 2.9 1.17 3.3 1.70 5.7 0.75 1.00 1.05 2.6 4.5 4.5 271.4 271.4 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 2 4.5 9.5 7 SM 1 Q 12 SPT 136.8 953 953 12.0 1.17 14.0 1.49 20.9 0.80 1.20 1.05 14.1 21.0 21.0 957.6 957.6 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.7 0.6 1.0 3 9.5 14.5 12 SM 1 Q 22 MC 130.3 1,620 1,620 9.0 1.17 10.5 1.14 12.0 0.85 1.00 1.05 9.4 10.7 10.7 1563.6 1563.6 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.7 1.0 4 14.5 17 17 SM 1 Q 19 SPT 130.3 2,272 2,272 19.0 1.17 22.2 0.97 21.4 0.95 1.20 1.05 26.5 25.6 25.6 2215.1 2215.1 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 5 17 24.5 22 SC 1 Q 48 MC 128.7 2,915 2,915 19.7 1.17 23.0 0.85 19.6 0.95 1.00 1.05 22.9 19.5 19.5 2831.4 2831.4 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 1.0 6 24.5 29.5 27 SC 1 Q 28 SPT 128.7 3,559 3,559 28.0 1.17 32.7 0.77 25.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 41.2 31.7 31.7 3474.9 3474.9 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.6 1.0 7 29.5 34.5 32 SC 1 Q 100 MC 110.9 4,158 4,158 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.71 34.1 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 35.8 35.8 3548.8 3548.8 0.9 0.1 0.8 1.0 0.6 1.0 8 34.5 39.5 37 ML 1 Q 41 SPT 110.9 4,712 4,712 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.67 32.1 1.00 1.20 1.05 60.3 40.4 40.4 4103.3 4103.3 0.9 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.6 1.0 9 39.5 44.5 42 ML 1 Q 68 MC 110.9 5,267 5,267 27.9 1.17 32.5 0.63 20.6 1.00 1.00 1.05 34.2 21.6 21.6 4657.8 4657.8 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.8 0.6 1.0 10 44.5 49.5 47 ML 1 Q 100 SPT 122.4 5,850 5,850 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.60 70.2 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 88.4 88.4 5752.8 5752.8 0.8 0.1 0.7 1.2 0.6 1.0 11 49.5 51.5 52 ML 1 Q 100 MC 122.4 6,462 6,337 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.58 27.6 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 29.0 29.0 0.41 6364.8 6240.0 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.0 3.57 12 51.5 59.5 57 SM 1 Q 35 SPT 132.1 7,128 6,691 35.0 1.17 40.8 0.56 23.0 1.00 1.20 1.05 51.5 28.9 28.9 0.41 7529.7 7092.9 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 3.57 13 59.5 65 62 SM 1 Q 100 MC 132.1 7,788 7,039 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.55 26.2 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 27.5 27.5 0.35 8190.2 7441.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 3.11 14 65 69.5 67 SC 1 Q 71 SPT 132.1 8,449 7,388 71.0 1.17 82.8 0.54 44.3 1.00 1.20 1.05 104.4 55.9 55.9 8850.7 7789.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ. 15 69.5 74.5 72 SC 1 Q 100 MC 132.1 9,109 7,736 41.0 1.17 47.8 0.52 25.0 1.00 1.00 1.05 50.2 26.3 26.3 0.32 9511.2 8138.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.0 2.81 16 74.5 77 77 ML 1 Q 100 SPT 132.1 9,770 8,085 100.0 1.17 116.7 0.51 59.7 1.00 1.20 1.05 147.0 75.2 75.2 10171.7 8486.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.0 NON-LIQ.

Version 3.4.2 Notes:

1. The correction factors CE (Energy Ratio), CB (Borehole Diameter), CR (Rod Length) and CS (Sampling Method-liner), CN (Overburden) are per Youd 2001

2. The conversion factors from MC-N to SPT-N are based on Caltrans Geotechnical Manual, "Soil Correlations" module (March 2021):

Cohesive: 0.65 Cohesionless: 0.41

3. For correction of overburden, CN = (1/sv')0.5 with a maximum value of 1.7.

5. For (N1)60,cs greater than 30, clean granular soils are too dense to liquefy and are classed as non-liquefiable.

Cyc. Resistance Ratio (CRR) /Cyc. Stress Ratio (CSR) F.S.=(CRR 7.5 /CSR)*MSF*Ks*Ka Post-Liq. Settl.

Field
Blow
Count
Sampler
Type
Unit
Weight
(pcf)
sv (psf) sv' (psf)
Ver. 2021-04-07
392
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

IV-3: Axial Pile Capacity Analyses
393
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Ultimate Skin Friction (tons)
Depth (ft)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 05101520253035404550556065707580859095100
Dia=2 ft
Dia=3 ft
Dia=4 ft
Dia=5 ft
Dia=6 ft
Dia=7 ft
Dia=8 ft
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
CIDH Shafts
(24- to 96-inch-diameter piles)
Assumed
Pile Cut-Off
Elev. 388.5'
Assumed
Existing Grade
Elev. 392.5'
10-foot neglected skin
friction zone to account for
potential temporary casing
End of LOTB data
Assumed
Design G.W.
394
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Axial Capacity (kips)
Pile Penetration (ft)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
05101520253035404550556065707580859095100
Skin Friction
Tip Resistance
Total Capacity
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
SAND
Class 200 Alt. "W"
(16-inch-diameter piles)
Assumed
Pile Cut-Off
Elev. 388.5'
Assumed
Existing Grade
Elev. 392.5'
End of LOTB data
Assumed
Design G.W.
395
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix V I GROUNDWATER DATA
396
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Unique Well ID Local Well ID GSA DTW Sp. '15 WSE Sp. '15 DTW Fall '15 WSE Fall '15 DTW Sp. '16 WSE Sp. '16 DTW Fall '16 WSE Fall '16 DTW Sp. '17 WSE Sp. '17 DTW Fall '17 WSE Fall '17 DTW Sp. '18 WSE Sp. '18 DTW Fall '18 WSE Fall '18 DTW Sp. '19 WSE Sp. '19 DTW Fall '19 WSE Fall '19 DTW Sp. '20 WSE Sp. '20 DTW Fall '20 WSE Fall '20 365143N1198529W001 16S19E25B001M North Fork Kings GSA 178.0 53.7 188.1 48.6 182.1 54.6 190.0 46.7 216.9 19.8 184.9 51.8 365150N1197327W001 16S21E30C001M North Fork Kings GSA 115.4 142.3 127.6 130.1 123.5 134.2 128.8 128.9 134.3 123.4 130.6 127.1 133.4 124.3 130.3 127.4 134.1 123.6 130.4 127.0 134.5 123.2 B06 B06 North Fork Kings GSA 187.0 -4.3 185.0 -2.3 182.0 0.7 186.0 -3.3 182.0 0.7 183.0 -0.3 181.6 -1.2 179.7 2.3 184.8 -4.7 B22 B22 North Fork Kings GSA 211.0 -11.8 210.0 -10.8 203.0 -3.8 209.0 -9.8 199.0 0.2 199.0 0.2 202.5 -3.3 208.0 -8.8 200.7 -4.6 200.9 -5.9 214.8 -18.9 B31 B31 North Fork Kings GSA 202.0 6.0 199.0 9.0 198.0 10.0 202.0 6.0 181.0 27.0 187.0 21.0 189.5 18.5 184.2 20.9 183.6 21.9 193.5 11.2 LID14 LID14 North Fork Kings GSA 174.0 61.9 183.0 52.9 164.0 71.9 188.0 47.9 157.0 78.9 157.0 78.9 151.0 84.9 181.0 54.9 155.0 80.9 169.0 55.5 167.0 57.5 171.6 52.8 LID21 LID21 North Fork Kings GSA 170.0 57.7 187.0 40.7 167.0 60.7 181.0 46.7 150.0 77.7 153.0 74.7 147.0 80.7 164.0 63.7 155.0 72.7 156.0 58.6 165.0 49.6 165.3 49.4 LID25 LID25 North Fork Kings GSA 254.5 -41.6 260.0 -47.1 223.0 -10.1 237.0 -24.1 187.0 25.9 179.0 33.9 171.0 41.9 174.0 38.9 174.0 38.9 168.0 35.2 158.3 43.2 165.3 37.9 LID26 LID26 North Fork Kings GSA 254.5 -40.6 239.0 -25.1 210.0 3.9 231.0 -17.1 182.0 31.9 173.0 40.9 172.0 41.9 200.0 13.9 172.0 41.9 184.0 16.1 178.9 19.1 183.9 16.2 12S19E33P001MX FC160 North Kings GSA 86.9 214.0 102.0 198.9 93.6 207.3 104.8 196.1 101.1 199.8 99.8 201.1 103.6 197.3 100.7 200.2 104.1 196.8 102.0 198.9 103.7 197.2 12S19E36J001MX FC091 North Kings GSA 146.8 185.0 145.8 186.0 149.0 182.8 153.4 178.4 152.3 179.5 152.0 179.8 156.2 175.6 147.0 184.8 12S20E23D001MX FC295 North Kings GSA 151.9 212.5 155.8 208.6 155.0 209.4 159.0 205.4 155.4 209.0 157.0 207.4 155.8 208.6 12S20E34K001MX FC092 North Kings GSA 160.8 199.3 162.9 197.2 165.1 195.0 178.5 181.6 162.8 197.3 169.5 190.6 161.9 198.2 170.5 189.6 165.3 194.8 169.0 191.1 161.0 199.1 174.9 185.2 12S21E29K001M FC29K1 North Kings GSA 90.0 291.5 102.2 279.3 94.9 286.6 90.5 291.0 76.0 305.5 77.6 303.9 77.0 304.5 80.2 301.3 75.5 306.0 71.2 310.3 75.0 306.5 12S21E34H001M FC34H1 North Kings GSA 63.1 329.4 66.1 326.4 66.1 326.4 61.3 331.2 117.9 274.6 61.8 330.7 61.5 331.0 61.0 331.5 58.5 334.0 12S22E19N001M FC19N1 North Kings GSA 44.5 396.1 89.4 351.2 48.2 392.4 26.2 414.4 24.5 416.1 31.1 409.5 35.5 405.1 55.3 385.3 35.2 405.4 33.9 406.7 73.0 367.6 12S22E26L001M FC26L1 North Kings GSA 29.9 457.7 68.5 419.1 22.7 464.9 47.2 440.4 24.3 463.3 26.0 461.6 13S17E25C001MX FD25C1 North Kings GSA 86.1 145.8 93.6 138.3 94.1 137.8 94.1 137.8 83.1 148.8 84.1 147.8 85.1 146.8 84.1 147.8 81.1 150.8 79.1 152.8 13S17E33M001MX FD32H1 North Kings GSA 117.4 92.7 116.9 93.2 119.9 90.2 112.4 97.7 113.4 96.7 111.4 98.7 112.9 97.2 107.4 102.7 111.4 98.7 107.4 102.7 119.9 90.2 13S18E17A001MX FD17A1 North Kings GSA 70.0 183.2 72.0 181.2 72.0 181.2 69.0 184.2 65.0 182.2 65.0 188.2 63.0 190.2 65.0 188.2 70.0 183.2 13S18E33M001MX FD32J1 North Kings GSA 91.5 145.8 94.5 142.8 93.5 143.8 91.5 145.8 85.5 151.8 82.0 155.3 84.5 152.8 79.5 158.8 81.5 155.8 79.5 157.8 87.5 149.8 13S19E11L001MX FC035 North Kings GSA 120.3 184.4 120.4 184.3 120.8 183.9 123.1 181.6 119.0 185.7 121.5 183.2 119.8 184.9 121.8 182.9 120.9 183.8 122.4 182.3 119.3 185.4 122.2 182.5 13S19E29A001MX FD29A1 North Kings GSA 81.7 185.2 87.7 179.2 88.7 178.2 90.7 176.2 91.7 175.2 89.7 177.2 90.7 176.2 86.7 180.2 90.7 176.2 88.7 178.2 91.2 175.7 13S20E27C001MX FC069 North Kings GSA 131.0 179.1 133.7 176.4 130.1 180.0 132.0 178.1 130.0 180.1 133.6 176.5 133.6 176.5 132.7 177.4 128.6 181.5 125.0 185.1 121.0 189.1 140.1 170.0 13S20E30B001MX FC074 North Kings GSA 125.0 179.0 126.0 178.0 124.2 179.8 126.0 178.0 123.2 180.8 127.5 176.5 121.0 183.0 122.0 182.0 120.9 183.1 120.7 183.3 117.9 186.1 119.0 185.0 13S21E19E001MX FC080 North Kings GSA 133.9 200.9 139.2 195.6 114.6 220.2 114.1 220.7 128.5 206.3 115.5 219.3 142.9 191.9 139.2 195.6 130.0 204.8 113.1 221.7 122.0 212.8 111.2 223.6 13S22E07R001MX FD07R1 North Kings GSA 56.5 335.1 61.5 330.1 58.5 333.1 62.5 329.1 51.5 340.1 61.0 330.6 59.0 332.6 59.5 332.1 58.5 333.1 62.5 329.1 61.5 330.1 65.0 326.6 13S22E32A001MX FD32A1 North Kings GSA 52.2 318.6 58.7 312.1 54.7 316.1 56.2 314.6 51.7 319.1 53.7 317.1 50.2 320.6 55.7 315.1 49.7 321.1 53.2 317.6 49.7 321.1 56.7 314.1 13S23E30B001MX FD30B1 North Kings GSA 19.2 391.6 35.2 375.6 19.7 391.1 18.7 392.1 6.7 404.1 10.2 400.6 13.2 397.6 8.2 402.6 6.7 404.1 9.7 401.1 8.2 402.6 24.2 386.6 13S23E33B001MX FD33B1 North Kings GSA 17.9 413.9 21.4 410.4 13.9 417.9 15.4 416.4 7.9 423.9 13.9 417.9 14.4 417.4 12.9 418.9 10.9 420.9 12.9 418.9 13.9 417.9 18.9 412.9 14S18E09H001MX FD09H1 North Kings GSA 104.2 132.1 108.2 128.1 108.2 128.1 106.7 129.6 101.2 135.1 92.2 144.1 93.2 143.1 91.2 145.1 92.2 144.1 91.7 144.6 94.2 142.1 101.2 135.1 14S18E32D001MX FD32D1 North Kings GSA 143.7 68.6 158.7 53.6 152.2 60.1 158.7 53.6 147.7 64.6 149.7 62.6 161.7 50.6 14S19E17C001MX FD17C1 North Kings GSA 90.9 158.9 98.9 151.0 98.9 150.9 94.9 155.0 93.9 156.0 90.9 158.9 92.9 156.9 92.4 157.4 89.9 160.0 94.4 155.5 14S19E33D001MX FD33D1 North Kings GSA 78.0 161.5 93.5 146.0 81.0 158.5 90.0 149.5 81.0 158.5 80.5 159.0 74.5 165.0 87.5 152.0 80.0 159.5 83.5 156.0 78.0 161.5 81.0 158.5 14S20E10M001MX FC003 North Kings GSA 109.7 181.7 109.9 181.5 111.6 179.8 110.0 181.4 107.5 183.9 107.1 184.3 106.1 185.3 104.1 187.3 101.0 190.4 101.6 189.8 99.0 192.4 100.0 191.4 14S20E22J001MX FC040 North Kings GSA 89.5 193.0 84.7 197.8 14S21E06Q001MX FC077 North Kings GSA 113.8 195.8 116.5 193.1 113.3 196.3 115.2 194.4 112.9 196.7 113.6 196.0 112.9 196.6 110.3 199.3 113.7 195.9 107.1 202.5 104.7 204.9 104.8 204.8 14S21E22D001MX FD22D1 North Kings GSA 75.2 242.6 80.2 237.6 83.2 234.6 80.2 237.6 82.2 235.6 79.2 238.6 79.7 238.1 83.2 234.6 80.7 237.1 84.2 233.6 15S19E02M001MX FD03J1 North Kings GSA 107.8 135.1 115.3 127.6 111.3 131.6 113.3 129.6 111.3 131.6 110.3 132.6 109.8 133.1 108.8 134.1 112.8 130.1 15S19E14M001MX FD14M1 North Kings GSA 145.4 95.8 142.5 98.8 145.4 95.8 140.5 100.8 140.5 100.8 139.4 101.8 138.4 102.8 137.4 103.8 140.5 100.8 139.5 101.8 15S20E07Q001MX FD07P1 North Kings GSA 108.8 143.4 114.3 137.9 112.3 139.9 108.3 143.9 112.3 139.9 116.3 135.9 15S20E13E001MX FD13E2 North Kings GSA 82.9 199.1 88.9 193.1 91.0 191.1 92.9 189.1 92.5 189.6 92.5 189.6 91.4 190.6 91.9 190.1 89.4 192.6 92.0 190.1 90.5 191.6 93.5 188.6 367113N1200785W001 14S17E14J001M North Kings GSA 171.0 39.5 144.8 65.7 158.5 52.0 156.3 54.2 144.3 66.2 149.0 61.5 153.0 57.5 130.0 80.5 147.0 63.5 367556N1196666W001 13S21E34J002M North Kings GSA 72.9 267.6 75.3 265.2 74.8 265.7 73.4 267.1 78.2 262.3 71.9 268.6 79.5 261.0 72.1 268.4 71.7 268.8 70.5 270.0 71.0 269.5 CID10 10 South Kings GSA 48.5 317.7 51.6 314.6 52.0 314.2 48.6 317.6 47.8 318.4 45.6 320.6 47.7 318.5 47.4 318.8 48.9 317.3 46.1 320.1 47.9 318.3 47.6 318.6 CID12 12 South Kings GSA 52.7 288.3 63.6 277.4 60.3 280.7 62.6 278.4 57.4 283.6 59.5 281.5 54.7 286.3 58.3 282.7 54.7 286.3 56.5 285.1 54.2 287.4 56.8 284.2 CID16 16 South Kings GSA 76.4 242.4 75.7 243.1 79.8 239.0 78.9 239.9 76.1 242.7 73.2 245.6 73.6 245.2 72.0 246.8 72.0 248.7 69.8 250.9 73.6 245.2 CID25 25 South Kings GSA 65.7 261.6 72.1 255.2 72.6 254.7 73.2 254.1 74.0 253.3 66.2 261.1 64.3 263.0 65.5 261.8 65.7 261.6 61.4 268.9 60.6 269.7 65.3 262.0 CID34 34 South Kings GSA 57.1 239.7 61.9 234.9 63.3 233.5 65.7 231.1 64.2 232.6 58.6 238.2 57.8 239.0 58.2 238.6 56.8 240.0 54.6 243.2 53.6 244.2 57.2 239.6 12S21E34H001M
397
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
●●
● ●
●
●
● ●
●●
●●● ●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●●● ●●● ●
●●
●
●●
● ●●●●
●●
●
●
●●
●
●
●●●
2025 IM 2030 IM
2035 IM
Measureable
Objective
SGMA Implementation
Period
265
275
285
295
305
315
325
335
345
355
365
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
110
120
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Y ear
Water Surface Elevation (ft)
Depth to Groundwater (ft)
●●●Interim Milestones (IM) Measureable Objective Measurements Minimum Threshold Trendline State Well ID: 12S21E34H001M
Ground Surface Elevation: 393 ft
North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency
368468N1196593W001
398
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

WCR0123026
399
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State of California
Well Completion Report
Form DWR 188 Complete 6/19/2020
WCR2020-007712
Owner's Well Number Date Work Began 06/15/2020 Date Work Ended 06/17/2020 Local Permit Agency Fresno County Environmental Health Department Secondary Permit Agency Permit Number WP0040541 Permit Date 06/12/2020 Well Location
7532 N LOCAN AVE Address
CLOVIS City 93619Zip FresnoCounty
36 Latitude 50 45.8015
Deg. Min. Sec.

N -119Longitude 39 22.6008
Deg. Min. Sec.

W
Dec. Lat. 36.846056 Dec. Long. -119.656278
Vertical Datum Horizontal Datum WGS84
Location Accuracy Location Determination Method
565-012-01APN
12 STownship
21 ERange
35Section
Mount DiabloBaseline Meridian
Ground Surface Elevation
Elevation Accuracy
Elevation Determination Method
Geologic Log - Free Form
Depth from
Surface
Feet to Feet

Description
0 20 BROWN HARD PAN, BROWN CLAY, AND SAND
20 60 BROWN CLAY WITH SAND AND GRAVEL LAYERS
60 80 BROWN CLAY, COARSE SAND, AND LIGHT GRAVEL LAYERS 80 100 COARSE SAND AND HARD PAN
100 140 HARD RED CLAY AND SAND
140 180 HARD RED CLAY LAYERS AND GRAVEL
180 200 FRACTURED DECOMPOSED GRANITE
200 240 GRANITE WITH STREAKS OF JOINT CLAY
240 260 FRACTURED GRANITE
260 303 BLACK GRANITE
Well Owner (must remain confidential pursuant to Water Code 13752) XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Name
Mailing Address XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX City XXState XXXXXZip
Planned Use and Activity
Planned Use
Activity
Water Supply Domestic
New Well
Borehole Information
Drilling Method
Orientation
Total Depth of Boring 303
Direct Rotary
Vertical
300 Total Depth of Completed Well
Drilling Fluid Bentonite
Feet
Feet
Specify
Water Level and Yield of Completed Well
61Depth to first water
Depth to Static
61Water Level
60Estimated Yield*
Test Length
*May not be representative of a well's long term yield. (Feet below surface)
(Feet)
(GPM)
(Hours)
Date Measured 06/17/2020
Test Type
Total Drawdown (feet)

Page 1 of 2 ends

400
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Other Observations:

Certification Statement
I, the undersigned, certify that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief Name STRICKLAND DRILLING
Person, Firm or Corporation
543 NORTH MONTE AVENUE FRESNO 93728CA
Address City State Zip
Signed electronic signature received
C-57 Licensed Water Well Contractor
06/18/2020
Date Signed
882088
C-57 License Number
DWR Use Only
CSG # State Well Number Site Code Local Well Number
N
Latitude Deg/Min/Sec Longitude Deg/Min/Sec
TRS:

APN:

W
Borehole Specifications
Depth from
Surface
Feet to Feet
Borehole Diameter (inches)
0 80 12.25
80 170 12.25
170 175 12.25
175 300 6
300 303 0
Casings
Casing
#
Depth from Surface
Feet to Feet Casing Type Material Casings Specificatons Wall
Thickness
(inches)
Outside
Diameter
(inches)
Screen
Type
Slot Size
if any
(inches)
Description
1 0 80 Blank Low Carbon
Steel
Grade: ASTM A53 0.156 6.625 STEEL
1 80 170 Screen Low Carbon
Steel
Grade: ASTM A53 0.156 6.625 Milled
Slots

0.08 STEEL
1 170 175 Blank Low Carbon
Steel
Grade: ASTM A53 0.156 6.625 STEEL
1 175 300 Screen PVC OD: 4.500 in. | SDR:
21 | Thickness: 0.214
in.

0.214 4.5 Milled
Slots

0.032
Annular Material
Depth from
Surface
Feet to Feet
Fill Fill Type Details Filter Pack Size Description
0 21 Bentonite Other Bentonite PDS CO 3/8\\\"
21 303 Filter Pack Other Gravel Pack #8 x 1/4"

Page 2 of 2 ends

401
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Appendix VI I ADVANCED PLANNING STUDY (APS) PLANS
402
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

RECORD DRAWING
RESIDENT ENGINEER DATEDESIGNED:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE
P. BRADBURY
S. VANG
G. GROSS
02/24/20
02/24/20
02/24/20

PROFILE

PLAN TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
Ret Wall No. 1
Ret Wall No. 2
3-SPAN SIGNATURE BRIDGE, L = 460'
APPROACH BRIDGE, L = 305'

RET WALL,
L = 100'
CONFORM, L = 181'
71+19.08

START PROJECT

EMBANKMENT,
L = 430'
88+12.71

END PROJECT

APPROACH

BRIDGE,
L = 218'

PROPOSED

HOSPITAL

SIDEWALK
14'
42" WATER MAIN
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 14'
403
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

RECORD DRAWING
RESIDENT ENGINEER DATEDESIGNED:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE
P. BRADBURY
S. VANG
G. GROSS
02/24/20
02/24/20
02/24/20

PROFILE

PLAN TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
2-SPAN SIGNATURE BRIDGE, L = 460'
96+76.46

END PROJECT

EMBANKMENT,
L = 418'

APPROACH BRIDGE,
L = 305'
APPROACH BRIDGE, L = 193'

RET WALL,
L = 150'

CONFORM,
L = 150'
80+00.00

START PROJECT
Ret Wall No. 1
Ret Wall No. 2
42" WATER MAIN
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 14'
14'
404
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

OSFP
5/9/01
Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 1 of 2

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/24 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 168 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge
The proposed project would construct a Class I trail/pedestrian bridge over State Route 168 in the City of Clovis. Three viable bridge types are considered in this Advanced Planning Study (APS).

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge Type 1 – Cable-Stayed Bridge
This alternative spans SR168 and Tollhouse Road. It includes approximately 987 linear feet of elevated bridge structure and approximately 44 linear feet of retained earth structure. From south to north the primary structural elements included the South Approach Walls, South Approach Structure, Principal Span Structure, and North Approach Structure.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge
Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 1 Purpose of this APS: Initial APS Cost & Feasibility Revised scope Update cost

P
art A Items to collect and considerations prior to beginning the APS

All items listed in Part A are to be made available and submitted if requested by the Liaison Engineer. (
Mark N/A if not applicable)

Preliminary profile grade of proposed structure.

Typical section of the proposed structure. (Including barrier type, sidewalks, cross slope %, etc.)

Grades or spot elevations of roadway below the structure.

Typical section of roadway below the structure. (Including shoulders, gutters, embankment slope.)

Site map: including horizontal alignment of new structure and the roadway below, topo, contours, etc.

N/A Stage construction or detour plan for traffic on the structure. (number of lanes to remain open, Temp Railing, etc.)

Stage construction or detour plan for the roadway below the structure. (falsework openings for each stage and any restrictions.)

"As Built" plans for existing structures.

N/A Future widening plans of upper and lower roadway (verify with Route Concept Report).

Site aerial photograph (at the proposed structure).

Environmental and/or permit requirements (areas of potential impact, construction windows, etc.)

Overhead and underground utility plans

405
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

OSFP
5/9/01
Any other information that you feel is necessary to complete the study. (Other concerns that may affect the APS: local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of structure, airspace usage, other obstructions, etc.)

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 2 of 2

Part B Considerations during the APS design and cost estimate preparation

1 . Has this project been discussed with: the OSFP Liaison Engineer? Yes the Caltrans District Project Manager? Yes
the roadway consultant? Yes

No
No
No

2. Have the Caltrans Structures Maintenance records been reviewed? Yes If the records recommend any work for the structure, is it included in the APS? Yes

No
No

3. A re there special aesthetic considerations? Yes No

4. (Widenings and Modifications)
H
as this project been reviewed for seismic retrofit requirements? Yes Are seismic retrofit requirements included in the APS? Yes

5. Any special Railroad requirements? Yes Shoofly required? Yes Cost of shoofly included as a separate item in the project cost estimate? Yes

No
No
No

6. Any special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation s
uch as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material? Yes

7. Any special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work? Yes

8. O ther items to be included in the cost such as slope paving, approach slabs, and/or adjacent retaining walls? Yes

9. Remove existing bridge?
T
otal Deck Area: Yes No

10. Any other unusual or special requirements? Yes No

11. Provide and attach a consultant prepared Design Memo to summarize and document any important assumptions, discussions, decisions, unusual items, local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, other obstructions, or any items noted above.

Summary attached? Yes

Designer: (Printed Name) D
esigner’s Signature: Date:

Shaun G. Sumpter 10/04/24

406
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

OSFP
5/9/01
Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 1 of 2

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/24 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 168 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge Type 2 – Cast-in-Place Box Girder Bridge
This alternative spans SR168 and Tollhouse Road. It includes approximately 987 linear feet of elevated bridge structure and approximately 111 linear feet of retained earth structure. From south to north the primary structural elements included the South Approach Walls, South Approach Structure, Principal Span Structure, and North Approach Structure.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge
Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 2 Purpose of this APS: Initial APS Cost & Feasibility Revised scope Update cost

P
art A Items to collect and considerations prior to beginning the APS

All items listed in Part A are to be made available and submitted if requested by the Liaison Engineer. (
Mark N/A if not applicable)

Preliminary profile grade of proposed structure.

Typical section of the proposed structure. (Including barrier type, sidewalks, cross slope %, etc.)

Grades or spot elevations of roadway below the structure.

Typical section of roadway below the structure. (Including shoulders, gutters, embankment slope.)

Site map: including horizontal alignment of new structure and the roadway below, topo, contours, etc.

N/A Stage construction or detour plan for traffic on the structure. (number of lanes to remain open, Temp Railing, etc.)

Stage construction or detour plan for the roadway below the structure. (falsework openings for each stage and any restrictions.)

"As Built" plans for existing structures.

N/A Future widening plans of upper and lower roadway (verify with Route Concept Report).

Site aerial photograph (at the proposed structure).

Environmental and/or permit requirements (areas of potential impact, construction windows, etc.)

Overhead and underground utility plans

407
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 2 of 2

Part B Considerations during the APS design and cost estimate preparation

1 . Has this project been discussed with: the OSFP Liaison Engineer? Yes the Caltrans District Project Manager? Yes
the roadway consultant? Yes

No
No
No

2. Have the Caltrans Structures Maintenance records been reviewed? Yes If the records recommend any work for the structure, is it included in the APS? Yes

No
No

3. A re there special aesthetic considerations? Yes No

4. (Widenings and Modifications)
H
as this project been reviewed for seismic retrofit requirements? Yes Are seismic retrofit requirements included in the APS? Yes

5. Any special Railroad requirements? Yes Shoofly required? Yes Cost of shoofly included as a separate item in the project cost estimate? Yes

No
No
No

6. Any special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation s
uch as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material? Yes

7. Any special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work? Yes

8. O ther items to be included in the cost such as slope paving, approach slabs, and/or adjacent retaining walls? Yes

9. Remove existing bridge?
T
otal Deck Area: Yes No

10. Any other unusual or special requirements? Yes No

Summary attached? Yes

Designer: (Printed Name) D
esigner’s Signature: Date:

Shaun G. Sumpter 10/04/24

408
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

OSFP
5/9/01
Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 1 of 2

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/24 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 168 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge Type 3 – Tied Arch Bridge
This alternative spans SR168 and Tollhouse Road. It includes approximately 955 linear feet of elevated bridge structure and approximately 72 linear feet of retained earth structure. From south to north the primary structural elements included the South Approach Walls, South Approach Structure, Principal Span Structure, and North Approach Structure.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge
Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 3 Purpose of this APS: Initial APS Cost & Feasibility Revised scope Update cost

P
art A Items to collect and considerations prior to beginning the APS

All items listed in Part A are to be made available and submitted if requested by the Liaison Engineer. (
Mark N/A if not applicable)

Preliminary profile grade of proposed structure.

Typical section of the proposed structure. (Including barrier type, sidewalks, cross slope %, etc.)

Grades or spot elevations of roadway below the structure.

Typical section of roadway below the structure. (Including shoulders, gutters, embankment slope.)

Site map: including horizontal alignment of new structure and the roadway below, topo, contours, etc.

N/A Stage construction or detour plan for traffic on the structure. (number of lanes to remain open, Temp Railing, etc.)

Stage construction or detour plan for the roadway below the structure. (falsework openings for each stage and any restrictions.)

"As Built" plans for existing structures.

N/A Future widening plans of upper and lower roadway (verify with Route Concept Report).

Site aerial photograph (at the proposed structure).

Environmental and/or permit requirements (areas of potential impact, construction windows, etc.)

Overhead and underground utility plans

409
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study (APS) Checklist Sheet 2 of 2

Part B Considerations during the APS design and cost estimate preparation

1 . Has this project been discussed with: the OSFP Liaison Engineer? Yes the Caltrans District Project Manager? Yes
the roadway consultant? Yes

No
No
No

2. Have the Caltrans Structures Maintenance records been reviewed? Yes If the records recommend any work for the structure, is it included in the APS? Yes

No
No

3. A re there special aesthetic considerations? Yes No

4. (Widenings and Modifications)
H
as this project been reviewed for seismic retrofit requirements? Yes Are seismic retrofit requirements included in the APS? Yes

5. Any special Railroad requirements? Yes Shoofly required? Yes Cost of shoofly included as a separate item in the project cost estimate? Yes

No
No
No

6. Any special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation s
uch as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material? Yes

7. Any special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work? Yes

8. O ther items to be included in the cost such as slope paving, approach slabs, and/or adjacent retaining walls? Yes

9. Remove existing bridge?
T
otal Deck Area: Yes No

10. Any other unusual or special requirements? Yes No

Summary attached? Yes

Designer: (Printed Name) D
esigner’s Signature: Date:

Shaun G. Sumpter 10/04/24

410
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study Design Memo

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/2024 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 101 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD

SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge

Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 1

Important or unusual design assumptions or structure features:

1. Signature structure desired by local agency/community.

2. Pile types and pile lengths were obtained from the preliminary foundation report dated January 18th, 2023.
3 . Fresno Irrigation District canal roads along the Enterprise Canal to be maintained.

4. Discussions with Caltrans personnel concerning any key assumptions:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Modifications from Structure Maintenance Records recommendations:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Seismic retrofit modifications:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

411
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, or other obstructions:

1. No adjacent improvements or obstructions have been identified.

2. There is a helipad on southeast corner of the Clovis Regional Medical Center complex. We do not anticipate construction to interfere with the airspace, but will continue to coordinate with the hospital.

3. Special Railroad requirements, including shoofly provisions and cost:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material:

1. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) has the potential to occur at the project site.

2. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Lead Stripping Paint (LBP) has the potential to occur at the project site.

3. 4.

Special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work:

1. Existing Enterprise Canal culvert is adjacent to Bent 5 and is to be protected in place.

2. Coordination with Clovis Regional Medical Center to minimize disruptions to the adjacent administration building and reconstruction of access sidewalk.

3. 412
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study Design Memo

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/2024 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 101 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD

SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge

Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 2

Important or unusual design assumptions or structure features:

1. Signature structure desired by local agency/community.

2. Pile types and pile lengths were obtained from the preliminary foundation report dated January 18th, 2023.
3 . Fresno Irrigation District canal roads along the Enterprise Canal to be maintained.

4. Discussions with Caltrans personnel concerning any key assumptions:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Modifications from Structure Maintenance Records recommendations:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Seismic retrofit modifications:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

413
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, or other obstructions:

1. No adjacent improvements or obstructions have been identified.

3. Special Railroad requirements, including shoofly provisions and cost:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material:

1. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) has the potential to occur at the project site.

2. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Lead Stripping Paint (LBP) has the potential to occur at the project site.

3. 4.

Special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work:

1. Existing Enterprise Canal culvert is adjacent to Bent 5 and Bent 6, and is to be protected in place.

2. Falsework over Tollhouse Road.

3. Falsework over SR168 and work in the median.

4. Coordination with Clovis Regional Medical Center to minimize disruptions to the adjacent administration building and reconstruction of access sidewalk.

414
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Consultant Prepared Advance Planning Study Design Memo

Date: C onsultant Firm (for structures): Phone No:
10/04/2024 Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. 559-449-8686
Designed by: Phone No:

Shaun G. Sumpter 559-449-8686
EA: County: Rte: KP(PM)
06-0U840 FRE 101 R9.4 / R9.5
Project Description:

The typical pathway clear width is 14 feet.

Bridge No(s): Bridge Name(s):

TBD

SR168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge

Total number of bridges in project: 1 A PS Alternative Letter or Number (if more than one): 3

Important or unusual design assumptions or structure features:

1. Signature structure desired by local agency/community.

2. Pile types and pile lengths were obtained from the preliminary foundation report dated January 18th, 2023.
3 . Fresno Irrigation District canal roads along the Enterprise Canal to be maintained.

4. Discussions with Caltrans personnel concerning any key assumptions:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Modifications from Structure Maintenance Records recommendations:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Seismic retrofit modifications:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

415
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Local agency requirements such as aesthetics, improvements in vicinity of the structure, airspace usage, or other obstructions:

1. No adjacent improvements, obstructions, or airspace restrictions have been identified.

3. Special Railroad requirements, including shoofly provisions and cost:

1. Not applicable.

2. 3.

Special foundation requirements, including scour critical work, special excavation such as Type A, Type D, and/or hazardous or contaminated material:

1. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) has the potential to occur at the project site.

2. Based on the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Lead Stripping Paint (LBP) has the potential to occur at the project site.

3. 4.

Special construction requirements, including limited site accessibility or seasonal work:

1. Existing Enterprise Canal culvert is adjacent to Bent 4 and is to be protected in place.

2. The edge of Bent 4 pile cap is within the travelled way of the SR168 eastbound lanes.

3. Coordination with Clovis Regional Medical Center to minimize disruptions to the adjacent administration building and reconstruction of access sidewalk.

416
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X A DVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: IN EST:

OUT EST:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: 3-Span Cable-Stayed Signature Bridge RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: 06-0U840 PM: R9.4/R9.5
LENGTH: 989.00 WIDTH: 16.00 AREA (SF)= 15,824
DESIGN SECTION:
#
OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : 1.00 EST. NO. 1
PRICES BY : ARC COST INDEX: 2024
PRICES CHECKED BY : SGS DATE: 10/4/2024
QUANTITIES BY: ARC DATE: 10/4/2024
C

ONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE) CY 1,340 $100.00 $134,000.00 2 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (RETAINING WALL) CY 106 $130.00 $13,780.00 3 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE) CY 630 $130.00 $81,900.00 4 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (RETAINING WALL) CY 160 $130.00 $20,800.00 5 24" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE PILING LF 2,565 $460.00 $1,179,900.00 6 48" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE PILING LF 1,440 $1,200.00 $1,728,000.00 7 PRESSTRESSING CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 8 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING CY 750 $800.00 $600,000.00 9 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE,BRIDGE (POLYMER FIBER) CY 210 $2,000.00 $420,000.00 10 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE CY 480 $2,000.00 $960,000.00 11 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, RETAINING WALL CY 106 $900.00 $95,400.00 12 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, CABLE STAYED DECK CY 230 $3,000.00 $690,000.00 13 FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (TOWERS) LB 244,000 $9.00 $2,196,000.00 14 ERECT STRUCTURAL STEEL (TOWERS) LB 244,000 $9.00 $2,196,000.00 15 FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (SUPERSTRUCTURE) LB 203,000 $9.00 $1,827,000.00 16 ERECT STRUCTURAL STEEL (SUPERSTRUCTURE) LB 203,000 $9.00 $1,827,000.00 17 STAY CABLES LF 2,940 $425.00 $1,249,500.00
18 JOINT SEAL (MR 1") LF 64 $100.00 $6,400.00
19 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE) LB 548,000 $1.90 $1,041,200.00 20 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (RETAINING WALL) LB 16,200 $1.90 $30,780.00 21 CHAIN LINK RAILING LF 1,980 $150.00 $297,000.00
22 FURNISH AND ERECT TUNED MASS DAMPER LS 1 $275,000.00 $275,000.00

SUBTOTAL $16,944,660
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $1,882,740

1. DES SECTION SUBTOTAL BRIDGE ITEMS $ 18,827,400

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES ( @ 25%) $4,706,850

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL BRIDGE TOTAL COST $ 23,534,250

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT $ 1,487.25

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST BRIDGE REMOVAL (CONTINGENCIES INCL.)

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORK BY UTILITY FORCES G
RAND TOTAL $23,534,250
COMMENTS: BUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF
Escalated Budget Estimate to Midpoint of Construction * Escalation Rate per Year
Years Beyond Escalated Years Beyond Escalated
Midpoint Budget Est. M idpoint Budget Est.
1 4
2 5
3 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 1 417
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X A DVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: IN EST:

OUT EST:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: CIP/PS Box Girder RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: 06-0U840 PM: R9.4/R9.5
LENGTH: 986.83 WIDTH: 16.00 AREA (SF)= 15,789
DESIGN SECTION:
#
OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : 1.00 EST. NO. 2
PRICES BY : ARC COST INDEX: 2024
PRICES CHECKED BY : SGS DATE: 10/4/2024
QUANTITIES BY: ARC DATE: 10/4/2024
C

ONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE) CY 1,090 $100.00 $109,000.00 2 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (RETAINING WALL) CY 267 $130.00 $34,710.00 3 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE) CY 625 $130.00 $81,250.00 4 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (RETAINING WALL) CY 400 $130.00 $52,000.00 5 24" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE PILING LF 3,780 $450.00 $1,701,000.00 6 PRESSTRESSING CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE LS 1 $129,000.00 $129,000.00 7 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING CY 500 $800.00 $400,000.00 8 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE (POLYMER FIBER) CY 390 $1,400.00 $546,000.00 9 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE CY 1,545 $1,400.00 $2,163,000.00 10 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, RETAINING WALL CY 285 $900.00 $256,500.00 11 JOINT SEAL (MR 1") LF 64 $100.00 $6,400.00
12 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE) LB 461,000 $1.90 $875,900.00 13 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (RETAINING WALL) LB 44,000 $1.90 $83,600.00 14 CHAIN LINK RAILING LF 1,980 $150.00 $297,000.00

SUBTOTAL $6,735,360
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $748,373

1. DES SECTION SUBTOTAL BRIDGE ITEMS $ 7,483,733

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES ( @ 25%) $1,870,933

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL BRIDGE TOTAL COST $ 9,354,667

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT $ 592.47

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST BRIDGE REMOVAL (CONTINGENCIES INCL.)

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORK BY UTILITY FORCES G
RAND TOTAL $9,354,667
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are for structure, civil work, electrical BUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF and landscape items of work only.

Costs for right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review fees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS&E), etc. not included.

Bridge width of 18 feet (14 feet net width Escalated Budget Estimate to Midpoint of Construction * + 4 feet cable connections and railings) Escalation Rate per Year Years Beyond Escalated Years Beyond Escalated
Midpoint Budget Est. M idpoint Budget Est.
1 4
2 5
3 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 1 418
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X A DVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: IN EST:

OUT EST:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: 2-Tied Arch Signature Bridge RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: 06-0U840 PM: R9.4/R9.5
LENGTH: 989.00 WIDTH: 16.00 AREA (SF)= 15,824
DESIGN SECTION:
#
OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : 1.00 EST. NO. 3
PRICES BY : ARC COST INDEX: 2024
PRICES CHECKED BY : SGS DATE: 10/4/2024
QUANTITIES BY: ARC DATE: 10/4/2024
C

ONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE) CY 1,580 $100.00 $158,000.00 2 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (RETAINING WALL) CY 175 $130.00 $22,750.00 3 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (BRIDGE) CY 720 $130.00 $93,600.00 4 STRUCTURE BACKFILL (RETAINING WALL) CY 260 $130.00 $33,800.00 5 24" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE PILING LF 1,755 $500.00 $877,500.00 6 48" CAST-IN-DRILLED-HOLE PILING LF 2,160 $1,200.00 $2,592,000.00 7 PRESSTRESSING CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE LS 1 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 8 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING CY 890 $800.00 $712,000.00 9 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE (POLYMER FIBER) CY 180 $2,000.00 $360,000.00 10 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE CY 565 $2,000.00 $1,130,000.00 11 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, RETAINING WALL CY 175 $900.00 $157,500.00 12 JOINT SEAL (MR 1") LF 64 $100.00 $6,400.00
13 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE) LB 514,000 $1.90 $976,600.00 14 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (RETAINING WALL) LB 27,000 $1.90 $51,300.00 15 CHAIN LINK RAILING LF 1,980 $150.00 $297,000.00
16 STUCTURAL CONCRETE, DECK CY 108 $3,000.00 $324,000.00 17 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (EPOXY COATED) (BRIDGE) LB 18,320 $2.50 $45,800.00 18 FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE) LB 356,200 $9.00 $3,205,800.00 19 ERECT STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE) LB 356,200 $9.00 $3,205,800.00 20 DECK CABLE ASSEMBLIES LB 12,834 $85.00 $1,090,890.00 21 METAL DECK SF 5,500 $9.00 $49,500.00
22 PERMANENT STEEL DECK EDGE FORMS LF 940 $30.00 $28,200.00 23 CLEAN AND PAINT STRUCTURAL STEEL (MAIN BRIDGE) LS 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 24 MISCELLANEOUS METAL (TRANSVERSE KEY TIE ANCHORS) LB 372 $25.00 $9,300.00 25 MISCELLANEOUS METAL (WILLIAMS BARS) LB 1,696 $20.00 $33,920.00 26 MISCELLANOUS METAL(RESTRAINER - CABLE TYPE) LB 320 $25.00 $8,000.00 27 MISCELLANEOUS METAL (END MEMBER COVER DETAILS) LB 800 $25.00 $20,000.00

SUBTOTAL $15,699,660
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $1,744,407

1. DES SECTION SUBTOTAL BRIDGE ITEMS $ 17,444,067

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES ( @ 25%) $4,361,017

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL BRIDGE TOTAL COST $ 21,805,083

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT $ 1,377.98

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST BRIDGE REMOVAL (CONTINGENCIES INCL.)

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORK BY UTILITY FORCES G
RAND TOTAL $21,805,083
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are for structure, civil work, electrical BUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF and landscape items of work only.

Costs for right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review fees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS&E), etc. not included.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning and Development Services Department
DATE: January 10, 2022
SUBJECT: Consider various actions associated with CIP 16-19, the State Route 168 / Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project, east of Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway.

a. Receive and File – Status update on the design of the pedestrian bridge.

b. Consider approval of terminating the pedestrian bridge design contract with Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Staff: Renee Mathis, Planning and Development Services Director / Mike Harrison, City Engineer
Recommendation: Receive and File and Approve
Attachments 1. Vicinity Map

2. Bridge Types, Alignment & Cost Estimates

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None

RECOMMENDATION
For the City Council to consider terminating the design contract with Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. (BCA) for the State Route 168 / Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In June 2019, the City Council authorized staff to enter into a contract with BCA for design engineering services on a proposed future State Route 168 / Enterprise Canal Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge Project, located east of Temperance Avenue, south of Owens Mountain Parkway (see Attachment 1 vicinity map ). The contract amount with BCA was for approximately $1.2 million and was comprised of federal competitive Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. The design contract with BCA included two phases of work.

Phase 1 work included development of alternative designs for alignment and bridge type, public outreach, and completion of the environmental approvals that would ultimately lead 154
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
Attachment 5
420
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
to the selection of a preferred bridge alternative. Phase 2 work included final design of the preferred alternative and completion of the construction documents.

Prior to the selection process for the City’s contract with BCA, staff worked with Caltrans on a preliminary study that indicated the cost of the City’s desired bridge would conservatively be in the range of $7 million. During negotiations with BCA, it was revealed that the cost estimate for a signature bridge structure was likely significantly under -estimated on the previous study. Therefore, the design contract with BCA was set up in 2 phases to allow for concepts to be developed and realistic estimates provided under the initial phase. At that point, decisions could be made to either terminate the preliminary design work or move forward and complete the final design.

To date s taff and BCA have developed four concept bridge options and construction cost estimates for the project as part of the Phase 1 work. The construction cost estimates are significantly higher than originally estimated; estimates range from $10 million to $18 million.

The four bridge types considered include the following with associated construction only costs:

1 – Caltrans standard box Girder Bridge: $10.7 million for construction

2 – 2 Arch Bridge: $15.08 million for construction

3 – 3 Arch Bridge: $15.1 million for construction

4 – Cable Stayed Bridge: $17.5 million for construction

Due to the substantially higher than expected construction estimates , staff has identified three project design options for Council consideration with a preferred staff recommendation. The three options include:

Option 1: Complete all Phase 1 work and then terminate the design contract with BCA. Remaining Phase 1 work includes: meetings with stakeholders, selecting a preferred alignment, selecting a preferred bridge type, and completing environmental approvals. Phase 1 costs to date total $360,000 (contract work and staff time).

Completion of the remaining Phase 1 work will cost an additional $245,000 in contract work plus staff time.

Under Option 1, the City would have to pay back approximately $260,000 in CMAQ funds that have been reimbursed to date. The reason the City would have to pay back the CMAQ funds is that the work identified in the grant, which included both work phases, would not be completed. Instead of the CMAQ funding the City would utilize street maintenance funds to cover all Phase 1 costs including the $360,000 spent to date plus an additional $245,000 in contract work and staff time.

Option 2: Complete all Phase 1 and Phase 2 work and seek additional design funds to finish all associated tasks. Remaining Phase 1 work includes : meetings with stakeholders, selecting a preferred alignment, selecting a preferred bridge type, and 155
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
421
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
completing environmental approvals. Phase 2 work includes: completing final design of the selected bridge type and completion of all construction documents.

Under Option 2, the City would need to budget additional funds above the $1.2 million in CMAQ funding currently allocated in order to complete the work. The amount of additional funding needed would depend on the type of bridge structure ultimately selected under the Phase 1 work. It is estimated the additional design funds needed could be upward of approximately $1.8 million given the higher cost bridge types. The source of these additional funds would likely be street maintenance funds.

Option 3: (Preferred Recommendation): Immediately terminate the design contract with BCA. The contract would terminate upon 30 days written notice to BCA.

Under Option 3, the City would pay back $ 260,000 in CMAQ funds that have been reimbursed to date , and would not spend any additional City funds , leaving the remaining Phase 1 work uncompleted. The City would end the contract with BCA with 4 bridge types, photo simulations of the bridge types, and estimated construction costs for each. The City could then use this information to seek other funding opportunities to complete the preliminary and final design, construction documents, and construction contract for the future signature pedestrian bridge.

Given the fiscal hurdles encountered to date with this project, staff is recommending that Council approve Option 3, directing staff to immediately provide written notice to BCA terminating the design contract.

BACKGROUND
In 2015 the City was successful in securing Active Transportation Plan (ATP) funds for the completion of a Project Study Report -Project Development Support (PSR -PDS) document that determined the need, feasibility and future development of the Enterprise Canal trail bridge crossing over State Route 168 (See Figure 1). The PSR -PDS report demonstrated that a future bridge in the area would provide a beneficial missing link for the City’s Class 1 Enterprise Canal Trail system, by providing seamless continuity over State Route 168. The future bridge would also provide a direct link for the commercial, residential, mixed use and business campuses both north and south of State Route 168.

Currently the Enterprise Canal Trail terminates north of Owens Mountain Parkway, where bicyclists and pedestrians are routed to Temperance Avenue. Trail users who wish to continue to the portion of the Enterprise Canal bank and future trail that lies sout h of the freeway must make their way to Temperance Avenue where they would cross under State Route 168 utilizing existing sidewalks and bicycle lanes.

156
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
422
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Figure 1

Based on study findings and cost estimates obtained while preparing the PSR-PDS, the City was successful in securing a $1.2 million federal CMAQ grant for the design of the project.

These funds were intended to develop alternatives for the bridge alignment, type, environmental reviews, and estimated costs that would then be used to sele ct a preferred alternative for final design and preparation of construction documents. The CMAQ funds were not intended for project bidding or construction.

The final PSR-PSD report indicated that the estimated design and construction cost for the bridge project would be approximately $10.5 million dollars . At that time, t he estimated construction cost of a signature pedestrian bridge type was approximately $6.5 million dollars. A signature bridge is considered a unique bridge type with distinguishing aspe cts that can serve as a landmark. The remaining $4 million dollars was estimated for design, construction management and right-of-way.

In developing this estimate , staff reached out to consultants that had experience with pedestrian bridge design and bridge costs. The consultants contacted included the Oregon Bridge Engineering Company (OBEC) and BCA. OBEC provided various cost estimates for signature bridge types. The costs ranged from $1.3 million to $3.2 million. At that time (prior to the City’s cont ract with BCA) , BCA assisted staff in providing a cost estimate for a signature bridge type in the amount of $7 million. With the completion of the study report, staff was encouraged by the conclusions therein and therefore proceeded with competing for grant funds to commence the design development stage of the bridge project. Even though the roughly $7 million estimated construction cost was much higher than anticipated when the project was originally conceived, staff felt that the research that went into deriving 157
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
423
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
the estimate was adequate and felt comfortable that it would cover the cost . It was acknowledged that securing construction funding for the project would be a challenge , but attainable.

In June 2019, the Council authorized a contract for design engineering services to BCA for the State Route 168 / Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project in the amount of $1.2 million dollars. During negotiations of the contract, BCA stated the City’s cost estimates were low for the type of signature bridge design that was desired (example arch and cable stayed spans) due to various complexities and constraints that were not known during the preliminary study. As is typical in the industry, BCA correlated the cost of the design to the estimated bridge cost referenced in the PSR-PSD report, so the cost of the design would go up if the estimated cost of the construction went up compared to the original estimate. Since part of the design process was to determine the brid ge type and alignment before moving into the final design of the bridge, staff structured the design development contract with BCA in two phases of work as follows:

Phase 1 – Preliminary Design $431,800

Phase 2 – Final Design / Construction Documents $776,200

Phase 1 work included development of alternative designs for alignment and bridge type , public outreach, and completion of the environmental approvals , ultimately leading to the selection of a preferred alternative. Phase 2 work included the final design of the preferred alternative and completion of the construction documents. The contract was structured in this way in order to provide the ability for decisions to be made regarding whether to proceed with the final design and, if so, the type of structure to design.

The current contract amount with BCA is based on a bridge alternative that can be constructed for an assumed $7. 4 million dollars. If the selected bridge alternative is more complex, resulting in a higher cost to construct, the contract amount with BCA would need to be amended accordingly. Knowing this, but not knowing the magnitude of the added cost, staff and Council proceeded with the 2-phased contract to provide an opportunity to make a decision on whether or not to proceed with the project if the obstacles and cost were found to be too much at the completion of the Phase 1 work . Currently, Phase 1 work is approximately 45% complete. Project expenditures to date total $360,000 (BCA contract expenses and staff time).

As part of the Phase 1 work, BCA worked with staff to identify four bridge types with a recommended alignment along with estimated construction costs of each. BCA provided the City with photo -simulations and estimates of the four bridge types. The bridge type s, alignment and cost estimates are included in Attachment 2 of this report. Some of the criteria considered when evaluating the bridge types included consideration of the context. The bridge is located between and connecting the hospital campus with the Research and Technology (RT) Business Park . Therefore, the RT Park Design Guidelines, construction costs, aesthetics, and right-of-way impact are all considerations. The general theme of the RT Business Park Design Guidelines is to produce a visually clean and “edgy” form reflective 158
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
424
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
of the clean technological businesses within the area. While a preferred bridge type has not been selected, staff believes the bridge options presented provide the de sired signature structure consistent with the context and RT Park Design Guidance.

Remaining items of work under Phase 1 include public outreach, meetings with stakeholders, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and the completion of California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) environmental documents. Phase 2 work entails completing the final design of the preferred alternative and completion of the construction documents.

The four bridge types include the following:

1-Caltrans standard box Girder Bridge: $10.7 million for construction

2-2 Arch Bridge: $15.08 million for construction

3-3 Arch Bridge: $15.1 million for construction

159
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
425
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

4-Cable Stayed Bridge: $17.5 million for construction

Based on the above construction estimates, project administration costs (such as staff time, additional design costs, and construction management time) will add an additional approximately 15% to 25%, resulting in a potential total project cost ranging from $13 million to $22 million.

Also, for any non-standard bridge types, such as the arch and cable stayed bridges, Caltrans has indicated that the maintenance responsibility would lie with the City. This would likely take the form of a maintenance agreement whereby Caltrans performs the actual maintenance using its crews or contractors, and the City would pay those an nual costs to Caltrans. The magnitude of those annual costs would depend on the final bridge type constructed.

The four bridge types identified above have yet to be vetted through the public review process, which is part of the remaining items of work un der Phase 1 of the design development contract.

PROJECT FUNDING
160
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
426
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

The design contract with BCA was budgeted in the 2021-2022 fiscal year budget through a CMAQ grant totaling $1.2 million. The City is using its formula based CMAQ funds to meet the grant match requirement of 11.47%.

Under Option 1: the City would complete all Phase 1 work and then terminate the design contract with BCA. To date the City has spent a total of $360,000 on contract work including staff time. The City has received a reimbur sement of $260,000 in CMAQ funds to date for Phase 1 work. Completion of the remaining Phase 1 work will cost an additional $ 245,000 plus staff time. Under this option the City would be required to pay back the $ 260,000 in CMAQ funds received to date. The reason the City would have to pay back the CMAQ funds reimbursed to date is that the work identified in the grant, which included both work phases, would not be completed. The City would utilize street maintenance funds to cover all Phase 1 costs, $360,000 spent to date plus $245,000 in remaining contract costs plus staff time.

Under Option 2: the City would complete all Phase 1 and Phase 2 work and seek additional design funds to finish all associated tasks. Under Option 2, the City would need to bu dget additional funds above the $1.2 million in CMAQ funding currently allocated in order to complete the work. The amount of additional funding needed would depend on the type of bridge structure ultimately selected under the Phase 1 work. As a gauge, if the City were to proceed with the highest bridge cost option (cable stayed structure), the additional design cost would increase to approximately 13-16% of the estimated construction cost for an additional design cost of approximately $1.8 million. Funding that would otherwise be used for street maintenance would be needed to finish the bridge design. The amount of the funding needed would directly affec t the amount of street maintenance projects the City would be able to deliver in the future.

If the City opted to complete all Phase 1 and 2 work, and then does not move to the next project phase (construction) within 10 years of the design funding alloc ation date, the City would be subject to paying back all federal CMAQ funds received. The design funding for this project was allocated in 2017, therefore the 10 -year term to commence construction would be 2027.

Under Option 3: (Preferred Recommendation): the City would immediately terminate the design contract with BCA. The contract would terminate upon 30 days written notice to BCA.

Under Option 3, the City would pay back $ 260,000 in CMAQ funds that have been reimbursed to date and would not spend any additional City funds , leaving the remaining Phase 1 work uncompleted. The costs spent to date on the Phase 1 work, approximately $360,000 (contract work including staff time ), would be covered with street maintenance funds.

Under Option 3 the City would end the contract with BCA with 4 bridge types, photo simulations of the bridge types, and estimated construction costs for each. The City could use this information to seek other funding opportunities to complete the preliminary and final design, construc tion documents, and construction contract for the future signature pedestrian bridge.

161
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
427
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Putting together funding for the construction of the bridge w ill continue to be an extreme challenge. Staff has been and continues to research available construction funding options.

Construction funding will most likely require a combination of sources due to the magnitude of the estimated cost. Staff has reached out to other agencies who have constructed pedestrian bridges in their jurisdictions. The jurisdictions contacted indicated that construction funding sources included local funds, various grants, and even corporate donations. Grant funding awards can be limited and would need other sources of funding to at least cover any match requirements. Match requirements can be up to fifty percent (50%) of the project cost. Higher match commitments make projects more competitive.

One potential construction funding source is grants issued by the State of California Active Transportation Program. These funds are extremely competitive. There is no match required, but to remain competitive the project would have to show leveraging of funds. Staff is also looking into any opportunities with the newly approved federal infrastructure bill. It is clear that cobbling together funding for a project of this magnitude would be an uphill battle, especially with no local funding currently identified for a match.

With the total project cost being 2 to 3 times what was anticipated at the completion of the PSR-PSD report, and the challenges associated with securing construction funding needed to successfully and timely complete the project, staff is recommending the immedia te termination of the design development contract with BCA.

FISCAL IMPACT
Under Option 1 and 3, the City would pay back $ 260,000 in CMAQ funds that have been reimbursed to date. This represents contract work and staff time submitted with the first CMAQ billing. A total of $360,000 has been spent to date (including the CMAQ billing). Street maintenance funds would be used to cover these costs.

In order to complete all Phase 1 work, local street maintenance funds would also be utilized to cover the remaining costs $245,000 plus staff time.

Under Option 2 the City would need to budget additional funds above the $1.2 million in CMAQ funding currently allocated in order to complete the work. The amount of additional funding needed would depend on the type of bridge structure ultimately selected under the Phase 1 work . It is estimated the additional design funds needed could be upward of approximately $ 1.8 million. The source of these additional funds would be street maintenance funds.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
Staff does not recommend allocating up to an additional $1.8 million in street maintenance funds to cover costs associated with all Phase 1 and Phase 2 design development work when street maintenance needs are so great. Staff instead recommends preserving these funds for street improvement projects.

In addition, with the complexity and uncertainty involved in securing final design and construction funding for the pedestrian bridge, the City could be in a posit ion of having to 162
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
428
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
pay back the $1.2 million in federal CMAQ funding expended on the design if the City is not able to commence construction of the bridge by 2027.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

1. Staff will Receive and File the status update on the design of the pedestrian bridge.

2. Staff will immediately provide written notice terminating the design contract with BCA.

Prepared by: John Armendariz, Civil Engineer

Reviewed by: City Manager JH
163
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
429
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
ðWðIðLðLðOðW
ðPðEðAðCðH
ðCðLðOðVðIðS
ðSðUðNðNðYðSðIðDðE
ðFðOðWðLðEðR
ðAðRðMðSðTðRðOðNðG
ðTðEðMðPðEðRðAðNðCðE
ðLðOðCðAðN
ðDðEð ðWðOðLðF
ðSðHðEðPðHðEðRðD
ðTðEðAðGðUðE
ðNðEðEðS
ðAðLðLðUðVðIðAðL
ðHðEðRðNðDðOðN
ðSðIðEðRðRðA
ðBðUðLðLðAðRðD
ðBðAðRðSðTðOðW
ðSðHðAðW
ðGðEðTðTðYðSðBðUðRðG
ðAðSðHðLðAðN
ðDðAðKðOðTðA
ðLðEðOðNðAðRðD
ðHðIðGðHðLðAðNðD
ðMðIðNðNðEðWðAðWðA
ðPðeðdðeðsðtðrðiðaðn
ðBðrðiðdðgðeð ðLðoðcðaðtðiðoðn
4 ð1ð"ð ð=ð ð8ð0ð0ð0ð'
ðAðTðTðAðCðHðMðEðNðTð 1
ðCðIðTðYð ðLðIðMðIðTðS ðSðPðHðEðRðEð ðOðFð ðIðNðFðLðUðEðNðCðE ðVðIðCðIðNðIðTðYð ðMðAðP
ðCðIðPð ð1ð6ð-ð1ð9ð ð-ð ðSðtðaðtðeð ðRðoðuðtðeð ð1ð6ð8ð/ðEðnðtðeðrðpðrðiðsðeð ðCðaðnðaðlð ðPðeðdðeðsðtðrðiðaðnð ðBðrðiðdðgðeð ðPðrðoðjðeðcðt ðMðAðYð ð3ð1ð,ð ð2ð0ð1ð9 164
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
430
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

ENTERPRISE CANAL CLASS I

TRAIL / SIGNATURE PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE OVER SR 168
City Of Clovis
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
165
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
431
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

RECORD DRAWINGRESIDENT ENGINEERDATEDESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:DATEP. BRADBURYS. VANGG. GROSS02/24/2002/24/2002/24/20

PROFILE

PLANTYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
Ret Wall No. 1
Ret Wall No. 2
3-SPAN SIGNATURE BRIDGE, L = 460'
APPROACH BRIDGE, L = 305'

RET WALL,
L = 100'
CONFORM, L = 181'
71+19.08

START PROJECT

EMBANKMENT,
L = 430'
88+12.71

END PROJECT

APPROACH

BRIDGE,
L = 218'

PROPOSED

HOSPITAL

SIDEWALK
14'
42" WATER MAIN
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 14'
166
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
432
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

RECORD DRAWINGRESIDENT ENGINEERDATEDESIGNED:DRAWN:CHECKED:DATEP. BRADBURYS. VANGG. GROSS02/24/2002/24/2002/24/20

PROFILE

PLANTYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
2-SPAN SIGNATURE BRIDGE, L = 460'
96+76.46

END PROJECT

EMBANKMENT,
L = 418'

APPROACH BRIDGE,
L = 305'
APPROACH BRIDGE, L = 193'

RET WALL,
L = 150'

CONFORM,
L = 150'
80+00.00

START PROJECT
Ret Wall No. 1
Ret Wall No. 2
42" WATER MAIN
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 14'
14'
Submitted alternatives 4 options 3A and 3B
advanced package to the City on 5/18/20.

City preliminary comments received on 5/21/20 and
6/1/20
Submitted revised alternatives 4 options 3A and 3B
package to the City on 6/15/20.

City comments received on 6/30/20 and 7/2/20
Submitted revised draft memo for options 3A and 3B
exhibits, photo-simulations, cost estimates and
narrative on 8/14/20.

Submitted estimated construction cost for Sierra
Gateway Trail (SGT) and park concept on 8/25/20.

City comments on revised package received on
9/30/20.
167
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
433
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

CONCRETE BOX GIRDER BRIDGE
168
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
434
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: I N EST :

OUT ES T:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: Caltr ans CI P/PS Box Gir der RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: PM :

LENGTH: WIDTH: AREA (SF)=
DESIGN SECTION:
# OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : EST . NO.

PRICES BY : COST INDEX:

PRICES CHECKED BY : DATE:

QUANTITIES BY: DATE:

CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 SIGNATURE CALTRANS MINIMUM BRIDGE L=460', W=18'SQFT 8,280 $350.00 $2,898,000.00 2 SIGNATURE BRIDGE AESTHETICS (5%) SQFT 8,280
3 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) L=305', W=18'SQFT 5,490 $315.00 $1,729,350.00 4 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 5,490
5 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) L=218', W=18'SQFT 3,924 $315.00 $1,236,060.00 6 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 3,924
7 8 RETAINING WALL NO.1 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 9 RETAINING WALL NO.2 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 10 11 WEST EMBANKMENT L = 430' LF 430 $550.00 $236,500.00 12 13 CIVIL TRAIL WORK (181'+100'+430')L=711', W=14'SQFT 9,954 $25.00 $248,850.00 14 15 TRAIL LIGHTING LS 1 $300,000.00$300,000.00
16 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00
17 LANDSCAPE LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
18 19 HOSPI TA L SI DEWA L K LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 20 21 DEMOLITION/ CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00 22 23 FENCING (430'+430') L = 860' LF 860 $150.00 $129,000.00 24 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
25 26
27 28
29 30
SUBTOTAL $7,592,760
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $843,640

1. DES SECTI ON PROJECT SUBTOTAL ITEMS $8,436,400

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 25%) $2,109,100

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL PROJECT TOTAL COST $10,545,500

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAWORK BY UTILITY FORCES $100,000 GRAND TOTAL $10,645,500
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are f or structure, civil work, electricalBUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF $10,646,000 and landscape items of work only.

Costs f or right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review f ees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS& E), etc. not included.Escalated Budget Estimate to M idpoint of Constr uction * Escal ati on Rate per Y ear 3.0%
Y ears BeyondEscal ated Y ears BeyondEscal ated
Midpoint Budget Est. Midpoint Budget Est.
1 $10,965,000 4 $11,982,0002 $11,294,000 5 $12,341,0003 $11,633,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 169 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
435
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

TWIN TIED ARCH BRIDGE
170
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
436
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: I N EST :

OUT ES T:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: 2-Span Tied-Arch Signature Bridge RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: PM :

LENGTH: WIDTH: AREA (SF)=
DESIGN SECTION:
# OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : EST . NO.

PRICES BY : COST INDEX:

PRICES CHECKED BY : DATE:

QUANTITIES BY: DATE:

CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 SIGNATURE BRIDGE L=460', W=18'SQFT 8,280 $665.00 $5,506,200.00 2 SIGNATURE BRIDGE AESTHETICS (5%) SQFT 8,280 $35.00 $289,800.00 3 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) L=193', W=18'SQFT 3,474 $315.00 $1,094,310.00 4 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 3,474 $35.00 $121,590.00 5 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) L=305', W=18'SQFT 5,490 $315.00 $1,729,350.00 6 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 5,490 $35.00 $192,150.00 7 8 RETAINING WALL NO.1 L=150', H=6.5'SQFT 975 $150.00 $146,250.00 9 RETAINING WALL NO.2 L=150', H=6.5'SQFT 975 $150.00 $146,250.00 10 11 WEST EMBANKMENT L = 418' LF 418 $550.00 $229,900.00 1213 CIVIL TRAIL WORK (150'+150'+418')L=718', W=14'SQFT 10,052 $25.00 $251,300.00 14 15 TRAIL LIGHTING LS 1 $300,000.00$300,000.00
16 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00
17 LANDSCAPE LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
18 19 HOSPI TA L SI DEWA L K LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 20 21 DEMOLITION/ CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00 22 23 FENCING (418'+418') L = 836' LF 836 $150.00 $125,400.00 24 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
25 26
27 28
29 30
SUBTOTAL $10,782,500
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $1,198,056

1. DES SECTI ON PROJECT SUBTOTAL ITEMS $11,980,556

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 25%) $2,995,139

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL PROJECT TOTAL COST $14,975,694

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAWORK BY UTILITY FORCES $100,000 GRAND TOTAL $15,075,694
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are f or structure, civil work, electricalBUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF $15,076,000 and landscape items of work only.

Costs f or right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review f ees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS& E), etc. not included.

Escalated Budget Estimate to M idpoint of Constr uction * Escal ati on Rate per Y ear 3.0%
Y ears BeyondEscal ated Y ears BeyondEscal ated
Midpoint Budget Est. Midpoint Budget Est.
1 $15,528,000 4 $16,968,0002 $15,994,000 5 $17,477,0003 $16,474,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. (Option B) 171
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
Attachment 5
437
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

TRIPLE TIED ARCH BRIDGE
172
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
438
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: I N EST :

OUT ES T:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: 3-Span Tied-Arch Signature Bridge RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: PM :

LENGTH: WIDTH: AREA (SF)=
DESIGN SECTION:
# OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : EST . NO.

PRICES BY : COST INDEX:

PRICES CHECKED BY : DATE:

QUANTITIES BY: DATE:

CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 SIGNATURE BRIDGE L=460', W=18'SQFT 8,280 $665.00 $5,506,200.00 2 SIGNATURE BRIDGE AESTHETICS (5%) SQFT 8,280 $35.00 $289,800.00 3 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) L=305', W=18'SQFT 5,490 $315.00 $1,729,350.00 4 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 5,490 $35.00 $192,150.00 5 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) L=218', W=18'SQFT 3,924 $315.00 $1,236,060.00 6 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 3,924 $35.00 $137,340.00 7 8 RETAINING WALL NO.1 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 9 RETAINING WALL NO.2 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 10 11 WEST EMBANKMENT L = 430' LF 430 $550.00 $236,500.00 12 13 CIVIL TRAIL WORK (181'+100'+430')L=711', W=14'SQFT 9,954 $25.00 $248,850.00 14 15 TRAIL LIGHTING LS 1 $300,000.00$300,000.00
16 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00
17 LANDSCAPE LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
18 19 HOSPI TA L SI DEWA L K LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 20 21 DEMOLITION/ CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00 22 23 FENCING (430'+430') L = 860' LF 860 $150.00 $129,000.00 24 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
25 26
27 28
29 30
SUBTOTAL $10,820,250
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $1,202,250

1. DES SECTI ON PROJECT SUBTOTAL ITEMS $12,022,500

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 25%) $3,005,625

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL PROJECT TOTAL COST $15,028,125

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAWORK BY UTILITY FORCES $100,000 GRAND TOTAL $15,128,125
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are f or structure, civil work, electricalBUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF $15,128,000 and landscape items of work only.

Costs f or right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review f ees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS& E), etc. not included.Escalated Budget Estimate to M idpoint of Constr uction * Escal ati on Rate per Y ear 3.0%
Y ears BeyondEscal ated Y ears BeyondEscal ated
Midpoint Budget Est. Midpoint Budget Est.
1 $15,582,000 4 $17,026,0002 $16,049,000 5 $17,537,0003 $16,530,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 173 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
439
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

TWIN TOWER CABLE-STAYED BRIDGE
174
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
440
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.
e GENERAL PLAN ESTIMATE X ADVANCE PLANNING ESTIMATE Revised - December 3, 2007
RCVD BY: I N EST :

OUT ES T:

BRIDGE: POC over SR-168 BR. No.: DISTRICT: 6
TYPE: 3-Span Cable-Stayed Signatur e Br idge RTE: 168
CU: CO:

EA: PM :

LENGTH: WIDTH: AREA (SF)=
DESIGN SECTION:
# OF STRUCTURES IN PROJECT : EST . NO.

PRICES BY : COST INDEX:

PRICES CHECKED BY : DATE:

QUANTITIES BY: DATE:

CONTRACT ITEMS TYPE UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
1 SIGNATURE BRIDGE L=460', W=18'SQFT 8,280 $855.00 $7,079,400.00 2 SIGNATURE BRIDGE AESTHETICS (5%) SQFT 8,280 $45.00 $372,600.00 3 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) L=305', W=18'SQFT 5,490 $315.00 $1,729,350.00 4 APPROACH BRIDGE (EAST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 5,490 $35.00 $192,150.00 5 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) L=218', W=18'SQFT 3,924 $315.00 $1,236,060.00 6 APPROACH BRIDGE (WEST) AESTHETICS (10%)SQFT 3,924 $35.00 $137,340.00 7 8 RETAINING WALL NO.1 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 9 RETAINING WALL NO.2 L=100', H=5.5'SQFT 550 $150.00 $82,500.00 10 11 WEST EMBANKMENT L = 430' LF 430 $550.00 $236,500.00 12 13 CIVIL TRAIL WORK (181'+100'+430')L=711', W=14'SQFT 9,954 $25.00 $248,850.00 14 15 TRAIL LIGHTING LS 1 $300,000.00$300,000.00
16 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00
17 LANDSCAPE LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
18 19 HOSPI TA L SI DEWA L K LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 20 21 DEMOLITION/ CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $100,000.00$100,000.00 22 23 FENCING (430'+430') L = 860' LF 860 $150.00 $129,000.00 24 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $200,000.00$200,000.00
25 26
27 28
29 30
SUBTOTAL $12,476,250
ROUTING MOBILIZATION ( @ 10 % ) $1,386,250

1. DES SECTI ON PROJECT SUBTOTAL ITEMS $13,862,500

2. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - NORTH CONTINGENCIES (@ 25%) $3,465,625

3. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - CENTRAL PROJECT TOTAL COST $17,328,125

4. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - SOUTH COST PER SQ. FOOT

5. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN - WEST

6. OFFICE OF BRIDGE DESIGN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAWORK BY UTILITY FORCES $100,000 GRAND TOTAL $17,428,125
COMMENTS: Costs indicated are f or structure, civil work, electricalBUDGET ESTIMATE AS OF $17,428,000 and landscape items of work only.

Costs f or right of way acquisition, city overhead,
permits, other agency review f ees, construction
management, specialty inspection,
engineering (PS& E), etc. not included.Escalated Budget Estimate to M idpoint of Constr uction * Escal ati on Rate per Y ear 3.0%
Y ears BeyondEscal ated Y ears BeyondEscal ated
Midpoint Budget Est. Midpoint Budget Est.
1 $17,951,000 4 $19,616,0002 $18,490,000 5 $20,204,0003 $19,045,000 * Escalated budget estimate is provided for information only, actual construction costs may vary. Escalated budget estimates provided do not replace Departmental policy to update cost estimates annually. 175 AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

Attachment 5
441
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Attachment 6
RESOLUTION 25-__

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE STATE ROUTE 168 ENTERPRISE

CANAL PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING PROJECT, PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES

WHEREAS, Caltrans, in cooperation with the City of Clovis, proposes to extend the Enterprise Canal Trail south of State Route 168 and provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to the Clovis Community Hospital complex by constructing a bicycle/pedestrian Class I overcrossing (“Project”). The Project lies east of Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway in the City of Clovis; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans, as lead agency under CEQA, caused to be prepared an initial study (hereinafter incorporated by referenc e) to evaluate potential environmental impacts from the Project, and on the basis of that study, it was determined that no significant environmental impacts would result from this Project; and

WHEREAS, on the basis of this initial study, a negative declaration (“ND”) was prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000, et seq.), and Guidelines for implementation of CEQA (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 14, §§ 15000, et seq.); and

WHEREAS, a notice of intent to adopt an ND and public comment period was published in the Clovis Roundup and the initial study and ND were made available at Caltrans District 6, City of Clovis, Clovis Regional Library, Caltrans website, and the City of Clovis website in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15072, subdivision (b)(2); and

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

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Clovis resolves and finds as follows:

1. The foregoing recitals as true and correct.

2. The City of Clovis, as a responsible agency under CEQA Guidelines section 15381, has reviewed and considered the initial study and ND and certifies that it has done so, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15050, subdivision (b)

442
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

3. That the initial study and ND were presented to the City Council and the City Council has independently reviewed, evaluated, and considered the entire Administrative Record including the initial study, ND, and all comments, written and oral, received from persons who reviewed the initial study and ND, or otherwise commented on the Project prior to approving the Project.

4. On the basis of the entire Administrative Record, that there is no sub stantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment.

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

6. 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.

7. The basis for the findings is detailed in the March 4, 2025 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 ND.

* * * * *

The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on March 4, 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED: March 4, 2025

______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk

443
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal
Pedestrian Overcrossing Project
Fresno County, California
06-FRE-168
EFIS 0616000055
State Clearinghouse Number: 2024061001
Initial Study
with Negative Declaration
Prepared by the
State of California Department of Transportation
and City of Clovis
August 2024
Attachment 7
444
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

General Information about This Document
What’s in this Document:

Document prepared by: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with assistance from Dewberry Engineers Inc.

The Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration circulated to the public for review and comment for 30 days between June 24, 2024 and July 24, 2024. Comments received during this period are included in Appendix B, which has been added since the draft document circulated. Elsewhere, language has been added throughout the document, if needed, to indicate where a change has been made since circulation of the draft document. Minor editorial changes and clarifications have not been so indicated.

Additional copies of this document and the related technical studies are available at the following locations: Caltrans District 6 office at 1352 West Olive Avenue, Fresno, California 93728, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; City of Clovis, Planning and Development Services Department, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.; Clovis Library at 1155 Fifth Street, Clovis, Monday through Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Sunday noon to 5:00 p.m. This document may be downloaded at the following website:
https://cityofclovis.com/planning-and-development/ceqa/ Accessibility Assistance
Caltrans makes every attempt to ensure our documents are accessible. Due to variances between assistive technologies, there may be portions of this document that are not accessible. Where documents cannot be made accessible, we are committed to providing alternative access to the content. Should you need additional assistance, please contact us at the phone number in the box below.

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document can be made available in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to California Department of Transportation, Attention: Trais Norris, District 6, Environmental Planning, 2015 E.

Shields Avenue, Suite 100, Fresno, CA 93726; (559) 320-6045 (Voice) or use the California Relay Service 1 (800) 735-2929 (TTY to Voice), 1 (800) 735-2922 (Voice to TTY), 1 (800) 855-3000 (Spanish TTY to Voice and Voice to TTY), 1-800-854- 7784 (Spanish and English Speech-to-Speech) or 711.

445
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  i State Clearinghouse Number: 2024061001
06-FRE-168
EA 06-0U840/EFIS 0616000055
Construct a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over State Route 168, east of North Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway, from the northern trail system near Owens Mountain Parkway south to the Clovis Community Hospital complex

INITIAL STUDY
with Negative Declaration
Submitted Pursuant to: (State) Division 13, California Public Resources Code

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Department of Transportation
and
City of Clovis

Javier Almaguer
District 6 Environmental Office Chief
California Department of Transportation
CEQA Lead Agency

Date

9/16/2024
446
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

447
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  iii Negative Declaration
Pursuant to: Division 13, Public Resources Code
State Clearinghouse Number: 2024061001
District-County-Route: 06-FRE-168
EA/Project Number: EA 06-0U840/EFIS 0616000055
Project Description
The City of Clovis, in coordination with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), proposes to construct a bicycle/pedestrian Class 1 overcrossing (project) spanning State Route 168 east of North Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway in Clovis, California. The project will extend the Enterprise Canal Trail south of State Route 168 and provide direct pedestrian access to the Clovis Community Hospital complex. The bridge spanning State Route 168 will be approximately 18 feet wide and 460 feet long, provide a minimum vertical clearance of 18.5 feet with a combined approach length of approximately 1,100 feet north and south of the bridge. The approaches will consist of embankment fill, retaining walls, and approach structures.

Determination
Caltrans has prepared an Initial Study for this project and, following public review, has determined from this study that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons.

The project will have no effect on agricultural and forest resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, and population and housing. The project will have less than significant effects to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and mandatory findings of significance.

Jav
ier Almaguer
District 6 Environmental Office Chief
California Department of Transportation
CEQA Lead Agency
Dat
e
09//16/2024
448
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

449
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  v Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Project ............................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Existing Conditions .................................................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................... 6

1.4 Project Description ..................................................................................... 6

1.4.1 Utility Relocations ............................................................................... 6

1.4.2 Lane and Road Closures ................................................................... 7

1.4.3 Clearing, Grubbing, and Tree Removals ............................................ 7

1.4.4 New Bridge Foundations .................................................................... 7

1.4.5 New Bridge Constructions .................................................................. 7

1.4.6 New Retaining Wall Construction ....................................................... 8

1.4.7 New Trail Extension ........................................................................... 8

1.4.8 Construction Equipment ................................................................... 10

1.4.9 Construction Schedule ..................................................................... 11

1.5 Identification of a Preferred Alternative .................................................... 11

1.6 Standard Measures and Best Management Practices Included in the Project ..................................................................................................... 11

1.7 Discussion of the NEPA Categorical Exclusion ....................................... 13

1.8 Permits and Approvals Needed ............................................................... 13 Chapter 2 CEQA Evaluation .......................................................................... 15

2.1 Determining Significance under CEQA .................................................... 15

2.2 CEQA Environmental Checklist ............................................................... 15

2.2.1 Aesthetics ........................................................................................ 16

2.2.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources .................................................... 21

2.2.3 Air Quality ........................................................................................ 22

2.2.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................ 27

2.2.5 Cultural Resources ........................................................................... 35

2.2.6 Energy .............................................................................................. 44

2.2.7 Geology and Soils ............................................................................ 46

2.2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................ 50

2.2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................... 52

2.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................... 57

2.2.11 Land Use and Planning .................................................................... 60

2.2.12 Mineral Resources ........................................................................... 61

2.2.13 Noise ................................................................................................ 61

2.2.14 Population and Housing ................................................................... 68

2.2.15 Public Services................................................................................. 68

2.2.16 Recreation ........................................................................................ 71

2.2.17 Transportation .................................................................................. 71

2.2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................. 73

2.2.19 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................... 78

2.2.20 Wildfire ............................................................................................. 80

2.2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................. 81 Appendix A Title VI Policy Statement............................................................ 83 Appendix B Comments and Responses ....................................................... 85

450
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  vi List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Regional Location ......................................................................... 2 Figure 1-2 Project Location ............................................................................ 3 Figure 1-3 Land Use Designations ................................................................. 4 Figure 1-4 Zoning Classifications ................................................................... 5 Figure 1-5 Proposed Temporary Detour ........................................................ 9 Figure 2.2.1-1 Alignment Option 1, Design Option 1 - Twin Tied Arch Bridge ...................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 2.2.1-2 Alignment Option 1, Design Option 2 - Twin Tower Cable- Stayed Bridge ............................................................................................... 18 Figure 2.2.1-3 Alignment Option 2, Design Option 3 – Concrete Box Girder Bridge ........................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2.2.10-1 Hydrology ........................................................................... 59 Figure 2.2.13-1 Sensitive Receptors ............................................................ 64

List of Tables
Table 1-1 Construction Equipment............................................................... 10 Table 1-2 Permits and Approvals ................................................................. 13 Table 2.2.3-1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards ................................. 24 Table 2.2.3-2 California Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................... 25 Table 2.2.3-3 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Plans .......... 25 Table 2.2.3-4 Construction Emissions Predictions Summary ...................... 26 Table 2.2.4-1 Natural Communities and Other Habitat Types in the Biological Study Area .................................................................................................... 29 Table BIO-1a. Native Species Seed Mix ...................................................... 33 Table 2.2.13-1. Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels ........................................ 62 Table 2.2.13-2 Typical Construction Activity/Phase Noise Levels ............... 65 Table 2.2.13-3. Construction Equipment-Specific Noise Levels ................... 65 Table 2.2.15-1 90th Percentile Response Goals and 2021 Response Time Performance ................................................................................................. 69

451
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  1 Chapter 1 Project

1.1 Introduction
The City of Clovis, in coordination with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 6, proposes to construct a bicycle/pedestrian Class 1 overcrossing spanning State Route 168 (project).

The project lies east of North Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway in the City of Clovis in Fresno County, California (see Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The project, which includes two alignment options based on bridge type, will extend the Enterprise Canal Trail south of State Route 168 and provide direct pedestrian access to the Clovis Community Hospital complex. The project will meet current applicable City of Clovis, Caltrans, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and Americans with Disabilities Act standards.

1.2 Existing Conditions
The City of Clovis limits extend along the Enterprise Canal, south of State Route 168, and along the southern edge of Tollhouse Road, south of State Route 168 and east of the Enterprise Canal. Therefore, the project site sits entirely within the City of Clovis; however, the project area extends into Fresno County (see Figure 1-2).

The project site is surrounded by a mix of commercial and residential areas to the north, commercial areas to the west, residential areas and the Clovis Community Hospital complex to the south, and residential areas to the east and southeast. The City of Clovis General Plan (General Plan) land use designations within and adjacent to the project area are as follows: Mixed Use/Business Campus (MU-BC), Office (O), and Rural Residential (RR). The Fresno County General Plan land use designation adjacent to the southeastern portion of the project area includes Rural Residential. The land use designations are shown in Figure 1-3.

The City of Clovis zoning classifications within and adjacent to the project area are as follows: Single Family Residential – 24,000 Square Feet (R-A), Single Family Residential – 18,000 Square Feet (R-1-Ah), Planned Commercial Center (P-C-C), Research and Technology Business Park (R-T), and Professional Office (C-P). The Fresno County zoning classifications adjacent to the southeastern portion of the project area include Limited Agricultural (AL20) and Rural Residential (RR). The zoning classifications are shown in Figure 1-4.
452
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  2 Figure 1-1 Regional Location

453
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  3 Figure 1-2 Project Location

454
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  4 Figure 1-3 Land Use Designations

455
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  5 Figure 1-4 Zoning Classifications

456
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  6 State Route 168 bisects the project site in a generally east-west trending direction, while the Enterprise Canal bisects the project site in a generally north- south trending direction. North of State Route 168 and west of the project site, Owens Mountain Parkway ends at approximately the Enterprise Canal. The project site, north of State Route 168, is generally undeveloped. A drainage basin sits adjacent to and east of the Enterprise Canal. West of the Enterprise Canal is new commercial development. The area east of Enterprise Canal is mostly undeveloped, with residential areas north and east.

South of State Route 168, Tollhouse Road parallels State Route 168 and crosses the project site in a generally east-west direction. Medical Center Drive is just south and west of the project site. The Clovis Community Hospital complex is south of the project site. Residences sit east of the project site.

1.3 Purpose and Need
The purpose of the project is to provide bicyclists and pedestrians a safe and continuous path of travel along the Enterprise Canal Trail over State Route 168. Short term, the project extends the existing Enterprise Canal Trail at Owens Mountain Parkway over State Route 168, providing direct access to the Clovis Community Hospital complex. Long term, this connection over State Route 168 provides a critical link for all bicyclists and pedestrians using the overall Enterprise Canal Trail system, as well as access to the future Sierra Gateway Trail System leading to northeast Clovis.

1.4 Project Description
The project would provide a bicycle/pedestrian bridge spanning State Route 168 to provide direct bicyclist and pedestrian access to the Clovis Community Hospital complex. Currently, two alignment options are offered, based on three bridge type options; the project limits and conditions remain similar between the three bridge types. For a rendering of each bridge type, see Figures 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2, and 2.2.1-3 in Chapter 2 in the 2.2.1 Aesthetics section. The bridge will be approximately 18 feet wide and 460 feet long, providing a minimum vertical clearance of 18.5 feet, with a combined approach length of approximately 1,100 feet north and south of the bridge.

The approaches may consist of embankment fill, retaining walls, and approach structures.

1.4.1 Utility Relocations
Existing utilities that conflict with project improvements and equipment will be relocated to accommodate the project design. Underground relocation for the overhead utility along Tollhouse Road may be considered. 457
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  7

1.4.2 Lane and Road Closures
During construction of the pedestrian overcrossing, the project will require a series of nighttime and/or weekend freeway and local roadway closures to place bridge falsework or construct the bridge deck. During these closures, one direction of traffic will be maintained on State Route 168. Temporary closures on State Route 168 will occur between the State Route 168/Owens Mountain Parkway intersection and the State Route 168/North Temperance Avenue interchange. These temporary closures of State Route 168 within the project site will require a detour onto North Temperance Avenue to East Shepherd Avenue continuing to State Route 168. Figure 1-5 shows the proposed temporary detour. If significant work is required adjacent to State Route 168 within the clear recover zone, temporary pavement will be constructed within the existing median so that two lanes in each direction can be maintained throughout the construction period.

Tollhouse Road will be closed for up to nine months for bent construction, with up to three additional nighttime closures for one week (Monday through Friday), or one weekend, for girder placement over the roadway.

One lane in the eastbound direction of Owens Mountain Parkway will be closed for three months to tie in the overcrossing’s north approach to the Owens Mountain Parkway pedestrian access.

1.4.3 Clearing, Grubbing, and Tree Removals
Ground disturbances and vegetation removal will occur as a result of the project. It is anticipated that landscape trees at the Clovis Community Hospital complex will be removed and replaced.

1.4.4 New Bridge Foundations
The new abutment seat and associated foundations will involve excavations of up to 13 feet. The foundation elements will consist of cast-in-drilled-hole piles or driven piles supporting single- or multi-column bents. Temporary shoring piles may be installed to support the excavation depths. The maximum depth of excavation is expected to be up to 13 feet, with a pile depth of approximately 100 feet.

1.4.5 New Bridge Constructions
New bridge construction will involve placing falsework to support the wet concrete of the superstructure, constructing bridge formwork, placing reinforcement, and then casting the bridge superstructure. Depending on the bridge type selected, precast or steel elements may also be used. A curb with pedestrian fencing will be placed at the edge of the deck as well as along the ramp approaches to the bridge.
458
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  8

1.4.6 New Retaining Wall Construction
Retaining walls will be constructed at both the north and south approaches to the bridge structure. A mechanically stabilized embankment will be used to retain the approach fill.

1.4.7 New Trail Extension
Trail extension construction will require excavation, placement of aggregate base, and an asphalt surface.
459
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  9 Figure 1-5 Proposed Temporary Detour
460
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  10

1.4.8 Construction Equipment
Table 1-1 provides a description of the type of equipment likely to be used during construction of the project.

Table 1-1 Construction Equipment
Equipment Construction Purpose
Air compressor Finishing work
Backhoe Soil manipulation, drainage work
Bid-well paving machine Concrete bridge deck finishing
Bobcat Fill distribution
Bulldozer/Loader Earthwork construction, clearing
Compaction equipment Earthwork
Concrete truck and pump Concrete placement
Crane
Placement of falsework, pile installation, concrete
placement, retaining walls and embankments.

Precast elements or structural steel placement.

Drill rig and truck Pile construction for bents and retaining walls Dump truck Fill material delivery
Excavator Soil manipulation
Flatbed truck Material handling and delivery
Front-end loader Dirt or gravel manipulation
Generators Power hand tools
Grader/Scraper Ground leveling
Haul truck Earthwork construction, clearing
Hoe ram Demolition
Holding tanks Slurry storage and suspended solid water settling Hydraulic hammer Demolition, concrete removal
Impact Pile Driver/Vibratory Pile
Driver Pile installation for bents and retaining walls
Jack Hammer Demolition, concrete removal
Paver Asphalt concrete construction
Roller/compactor Earthwork, concrete or asphalt construction, utility relocation
Rubber tired boom truck Lifting
Truck with seed sprayer Landscaping
Water truck Earthwork construction, dust control
461
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  11

1.4.9 Construction Schedule
Construction of the project is anticipated to take approximately 18 to 24 months to complete. The construction period is scheduled to begin as early as spring 2026.

1.5 Identification of a Preferred Alternative
Two alternatives were under consideration for this project: Alternative 1: Build Alternative and Alternative 2: No-Build Alternative. Alternative 1: Build Alternative has been selected as the preferred alternative. The project will provide a critical link over State Route 168 for all bicyclists and pedestrians using the overall Enterprise Canal Trail system, as well as access to the future Sierra Gateway Trail System leading to northeast Clovis.

1.6 Standard Measures and Best Management Practices
Included in the Project
Best management practices for air quality and greenhouse gas emissions include:
• Dust and Particulate Matter
o Prepare and implement a Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
o All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively used for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or vegetative ground cover. o All on-site unpaved roads/access areas and off-site unpaved access roads/areas shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
o All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions using application of water or by presoaking. o When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and a minimum of 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. o All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt (trackout) from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 feet or more from the site and 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.) 462
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  12 o 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 using sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or vegetative ground cover.
o Limit traffic speeds on unpaved areas to 15 miles per hour. • Ozone and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
o Alternative-fueled or catalyst-equipped diesel construction equipment shall be used for the project.
o Idling time shall be reduced by shutting off equipment not in use or by minimizing idling time to 5 minutes maximum (required by California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485). o Fossil-fueled equipment shall be replaced by electrically driven equivalents (provided they are not run via a portable generator set). o Construction shall be curtailed during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during the peak-hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways. o Activity management shall be implemented (e.g., rescheduling activities to reduce short-term impacts).
o Following construction, all fill slopes, temporary impact areas, and/or otherwise disturbed areas shall be restored to preconstruction contours (if necessary) and revegetated with the native seed mix specified in Avoidance and Minimization Measure BIO-1, Table BIO-1a.

Best management practices for hydrology and water quality include:
• Obtain and implement the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit with the associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. • Implement appropriate measures to prevent debris, soil, rock, or other material from entering the water. Use a water truck or other appropriate measures to control dust on applicable access roads, construction areas, and stockpiles. • Properly dispose of oil or other liquids.
• Fuel and maintain vehicles in a specified area that is designed to capture spills. All fueling and maintenance of vehicles and other equipment (including staging areas) will be located at least 65 feet from any potential drainages on site.
• Fuels and hazardous materials will not be stored on-site. • Inspect and maintain vehicles and equipment to prevent the dripping of oil or other fluids.
• Schedule construction to avoid the rainy season as much as possible.

Ground disturbance activities are expected to begin in the spring. If rains 463
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 1  Project
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  13 are forecasted during construction, additional erosion and sedimentation control measures will be implemented.
• Maintain sediment and erosion control measures during construction.

Inspect the control measures before, during, and after a rain event. • Train construction workers in stormwater pollution prevention practices. • Revegetate disturbed areas in a timely manner to control erosion.

1.7 Discussion of the NEPA Categorical Exclusion
This document contains information regarding compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and other state laws and regulations. Separate environmental documentation, supporting a Categorical Exclusion determination, has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. When needed for clarity, or as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, this document may contain references to federal laws and/or regulations (the California Environmental Quality Act, for example, requires consideration of adverse effects on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species by the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services – that is, species protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act).

1.8 Permits and Approvals Needed
Table 1-2 provides information regarding the permits, licenses, agreements, and certifications required for the project.

Table 1-2 Permits and Approvals
Agency Permit, License,
Agreement, or Certification Status
Caltrans Encroachment Permit Application to follow approval of Initial Study/Negative Declaration
and Categorical Exclusion
Central Valley Regional
Water Quality Control
Board
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Permit –
Construction General Permit
Notice of Intent filed upon
construction contract award
City of Clovis Encroachment Permit Application to follow approval of Initial Study/Negative Declaration
and Categorical Exclusion
City of Clovis Tree Removal Permit Application to follow approval of Initial Study/Negative Declaration
and Categorical Exclusion
Fresno County Encroachment Permit Application to follow approval of Initial Study/Negative Declaration
and Categorical Exclusion.
464
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

465
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  15 Chapter 2 CEQA Evaluation

2.1 Determining Significance under CEQA
The project is subject to federal as well as City of Clovis and state environmental review requirements because the City of Clovis proposes the use of federal funds from the Federal Highway Administration and/or the project requires an approval from the Federal Highway Administration. Project documentation, therefore, has been prepared in compliance with both the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, as discussed in Section 1.7, above.

The California Environmental Quality Act requires the lead agency (for this project, the lead agency is Caltrans) to identify each “significant effect on the environment” resulting from the project and ways to mitigate each significant effect. Each and every significant effect on the environment must be disclosed in the environmental document and mitigated if feasible. If the project has a significant effect on any environmental resource after mitigation, then an Environmental Impact Report must be prepared. This chapter discusses the effects of the project and provides avoidance and minimization measures, where additional clarification on standard practices is beneficial to the understanding of the project.

2.2 CEQA Environmental Checklist
This checklist identifies physical, biological, social, and economic factors that might be affected by the project. Potential impact determinations include Significant and Unavoidable Impact, Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated, Less Than Significant Impact, and No Impact. In many cases, background studies performed in connection with a project will indicate that there are no impacts to a particular resource. A “No Impact” answer reflects this determination. The questions in this checklist are intended to encourage the thoughtful assessment of impacts and do not represent thresholds of significance.

Project features, which can include both design elements of the project and standardized measures that are applied to all or most Caltrans projects, such as best management practices and measures included in the Standard Plans and Specifications or as Standard Special Provisions, are considered to be an integral part of the project and have been considered prior to any significance determinations documented below.
“No Impact” determinations in each section are based on the scope, description, and location of the project as well as the appropriate technical report and no further discussion is included in this document. 466
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  16

2.2.1 Aesthetics
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated May 2018, the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, and Figures 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2, and 2.2.1-3 showing the three bridge types (following the checklist answers), the following significance determinations have been made:

Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from a 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
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
The hills near the State Route 168/Tollhouse Road interchange are identified as “landscape features” in the City of Clovis General Plan. In addition, the City of Clovis’ greatest natural resource, although outside City of Clovis boundaries, is commonly considered to be the Sierra Nevada, with the foothills beginning east of the City of Clovis limits. The views of these mountains and foothills are visible from the project site on clear days, and the relatively flat topography along State Route 168 allows more direct views.

The major roadways, used by both residents of the City of Clovis and regional commuters, within and adjacent to the project area include State Route 168, North Temperance Avenue, Owens Mountain Parkway, and Tollhouse Road. No officially designated State Scenic Highways or National Scenic Byways are located within the project vicinity. State Route 168 is identified as an eligible State Scenic Highway within the project boundaries; however, it is not officially designated within or adjacent to the project. The nearest designated State Scenic Highway is State Route 65 (beginning near Minkler and extending to the General Grant Grove section of Kings Canyon National Park), approximately 14 miles southeast of the project. The nearest National Scenic Byway is Tioga Road/Big Oak Flat Road, approximately 103 miles north of the project site.

467
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  17 Figure 2.2.1-1 Alignment Option 1, Design Option 1 - Twin Tied Arch Bridge

468
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  18 Figure 2.2.1-2 Alignment Option 1, Design Option 2 - Twin Tower Cable-Stayed Bridge

469
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  19 Figure 2.2.1-3 Alignment Option 2, Design Option 3 – Concrete Box Girder Bridge

470
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  20 Sensitive viewing receptors in the vicinity of the project include roadway users, pedestrians, the residences along North Locan Avenue and Goshen Avenue, employees and customers at the commercial areas along Owens Mountain Parkway, and employees and patients at the Clovis Community Hospital complex. Views from the roadways in the project area contain commercial, residential, open space, and the Clovis Community Hospital complex in the middle and foreground, with generally unobstructed views of the foothills and mountains in the background.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a, c, and d in the table) Construction activities will temporarily affect the visual environment surrounding the project site because construction equipment can block views of the foothills and the valley. However, construction equipment will be removed from the area upon construction completion.

During nighttime work, lighting required for construction will be directed at the area of construction and not the adjacent roadways. One side of State Route 168 will be closed at a time for construction. Therefore, the users of State Route 168 on the other side of the median will experience an increase in light in the area; however, it will not pose a danger to nighttime driving activities.

Nighttime construction lighting will be short term (one week [Monday through Friday] of nights, or one weekend).

The project is identified in the City of Clovis General Plan and will be implemented in accordance with the City of Clovis and state regulations and guidelines. In addition, construction activities will comply with federal, state, and local rules and regulations regarding construction and visual resources. Therefore, the project construction activities will not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Therefore, construction impacts from the project will be less than significant with respect to light and glare.

Upon construction completion, construction staging areas will be restored to conditions similar to existing conditions and landscape trees at the Clovis Community Hospital complex will be replaced. The bridge will partially block views of the foothils for eastbound travelers and the valley for westbound travelers; however, the bridge is anticipated to act as a gateway for the City of Clovis as people enter into the City of Clovis when traveling westbound and when leaving the City of Clovis traveling eastbound on State Route 168 (see Figures 2.2.1-1 through 2.2.1-3).

The project will be made with materials that reduce glare, and the lights installed for pedestrian and bicycle safety will be directed downward and toward the pathway to reduce light pollution. In addition, cyclists riding at night, required to use bicycle headlights, will be similar to the conditions on the existing interchanges, roadways, and existing segments of the Enterprise Canal Trail system. Residents will not experience a noticeable difference in nighttime lights because the existing roadways currently have streetlights. 471
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  21 Drivers on adjacent roadways, and especially on State Route 168, will notice the lighting on the overcrossing, similar to other interchanges in the area.

Operational impacts of the project will have a less than significant impact on aesthetics, light, and glare.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
AES-1: During nighttime work, lighting required for construction will be directed at the area of construction and not the adjacent roadways. Nighttime construction lighting will be short term (one week [Monday through Friday] of nights, or one weekend).

AES-2: Following construction, all fill slopes, temporary impact and/or otherwise disturbed areas, such as construction staging areas, shall be restored to preconstruction contours (if necessary) and revegetated with the native seed mix. Invasive exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable. Landscape trees at the Clovis Community Hospital complex will be replaced.

AES-3: Materials that reduce glare will be used for the overcrossing, such as matte finishing and low reflective materials. Lighting will be directed downward and toward the pathway.

AES-4: Given that this portion of State Route 168 provides scenic, open views for the commuter, the bridge will serve as a gateway path for commuters traveling westbound, and present a visually appealing bridge along their route. The project will incorporate aesthetic elements for the bridge design that complement the surrounding natural and built landscape.

These elements will be reviewed and approved by the City of Clovis and the California Department of Transportation prior to the start of construction.

2.2.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated May 2018, the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated 472
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  22 October 2019, the California Department of Conservation Important Farmland Map dated 2017, and the City of Clovis Williamson Act Lands Map dated 2014, the following determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
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?
No Impact
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
No Impact
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact

2.2.3 Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Considering the information in the Air Quality Technical Memorandum dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant
Impact
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less Than Significant
Impact
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Less Than Significant
Impact
473
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  23 Affected Environment
The project lies in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is bounded by the Tehachapi Mountain Range to the south, the San Joaquin Delta to the north, the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range to the east, and lower coastal mountain ranges in the west. The climate consists of hot, dry summers and cool winters.

The project site sits within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Air quality districts are public health agencies whose mission is to improve the health and quality of life for all residents through effective air quality management strategies. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District is responsible for ensuring healthy regional air quality conditions and meeting state and federal health standards to protect human health and natural ecosystems.

The federal Clean Air Act requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards for major pollutants that could be detrimental to the environment and human health. The California Ambient Air Quality Standards are the state equivalent of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. An air basin is in “attainment” (compliance) when the levels of the pollutant in that air basin are below National Ambient Air Quality Standards and California Ambient Air Quality Standards thresholds.

Table 2.2.3-1 provides information on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and Table 2.2.3-2 provides information on the California Ambient Air Quality Standards. In the tables, ppm stands for parts per million; ppb stands for parts per billion; and μg/m3 stands for micrograms per cubic meter.

474
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  24 Table 2.2.3-1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Standard
Type
Averaging
Time
Concentration
Threshold Form
Carbon monoxide
(CO)
Primary 8 hours 9 ppm Not to be exceeded more
than once per year
Carbon monoxide
(CO)
Primary 1 hour 35 ppm Not to be exceeded more
than once per year
Lead (Pb) Primary and
secondary
Rolling 3-
month
average

0.15 μg/m3 Not to be exceeded
Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
Primary 1 hour 100 ppb 98th percentile of 1-hour
daily maximum
concentrations, averaged
over 3 years
Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
Primary and
secondary
1 year 53 ppb Annual mean
Ozone (O2) Primary and
secondary
8 hours 0.070 ppm Annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour
concentration, averaged
over 3 years
Particulate Matter
(PM) 2.5 (PM2.5)
Primary 1 year 12.0 μg/m3 Annual mean, averaged
over 3 years
Particulate Matter
(PM) 2.5 (PM2.5)
Secondary 1 year 15.0 μg/m3 Annual mean, averaged
over 3 years
Particulate Matter
(PM) 2.5 (PM2.5)
Primary and
secondary
24 hours 35 μg/m3 98th percentile, averaged
over 3 years
PM10 Primary and
secondary
24 hours 150 μg/m3 Not to be exceeded more
than once per year on
average over 3 years
Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Primary 1 hour 75 ppb 99th percentile of 1 hour
daily maximum
concentrations, averaged
over 3 years
Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Secondary 3 hours 0.5 ppm Not to be exceeded more
than once per year
Source: Dewberry, 2022.
475
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  25 Table 2.2.3-2 California Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time Concentration
Threshold
Carbon monoxide (CO) 8 hours 0.09 ppm
Carbon monoxide (CO) 1 hour 0.070 ppm
Lead (Pb) 1.5 0.15 μg/m3
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1 hour 0.18 ppm
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) Annual arithmetic mean 0.030 ppm Ozone (O2) 8 hours 0.09 ppm
Ozone (O2) 1 hour 0.070 ppm
Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5) Annual arithmetic mean 12.0 μg/m3 PM10 24 hours 50 μg/m3
PM10 Annual arithmetic mean 20 µg/m3
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 1 hour 0.25 ppm
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 24 hours 0.04 ppm
Visibility-reducing particles 9 hours Extinction of 0.23 per kilometer
Sulfates 24 hours 25 µg/m3
Hydrogen sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm
Vinyl chloride 24 hours 0.01 ppm
Source: Dewberry, 2022.

The project site is in an area that is currently in federal non-attainment for ozone (8-hour) and particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5).

The site is also in an area that is currently in state non-attainment for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. As shown in Table 2.2.3-3, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has prepared the following plans to address regional non-attainment of criteria pollutant standards.

Table 2.2.3-3 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Plans Plan Title Applicable Standard
2005 CO Re-designation Request and
Maintenance Plan 8-Hour CO NAAQS (1971)
2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan 24-Hour PM10 NAAQS (2006)
2012 PM2.5 Plan 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS (2006)
2013 Plan for the Revoked 1-Hour Ozone
Standard 1-Hour O3 NAAQS (Revoked 2005)
2015 Plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard 24-Hour and Annual PM2.5 NAAQS (1997) 2016 Ozone Plan for the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone Standard 8-Hour O3 NAAQS (2008)
2016 Moderate Area Plan for the 2012
PM2.5 Standard 24-Hour and Annual PM2.5 NAAGS (2012)
Source: Dewberry, 2022.

Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as residential uses, schools, daycare centers, nursing homes, and medical centers. Individuals particularly vulnerable to diesel particulate matter are children, whose lung tissue is still developing, and the elderly, who may have serious health problems that can be 476
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  26 aggravated by exposure to diesel particulate matter. Sensitive receptors within close proximity of the project include the following:
• Medical offices (Clovis Community Hospital complex), the closest building is approximately 65 feet southwest of the project study area. • Single-family homes, the closest of which is on Locan Avenue and is approximately 60 feet southeast of the project study area. • Pre-School/Daycare facility (Kids Kare Owens Ranch) on Owens Mountain Parkway, west of Enterprise Canal, approximately 430 feet northwest of the project study area.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, c, and d in the table) The main source of air pollution for the project will occur as a result of construction activities and construction-related vehicle emissions. The project is in an area of federal non-attainment for ozone and PM

2.5, and state non-
attainment for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. Under guidance from the City of Clovis and Caltrans, construction emissions were estimated using the Road Construction Emissions Model by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, which is the accepted model for roadway projects throughout California. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that construction will last 21 months for modeling purposes, the total project area will be a total of 8 acres, and the maximum area disturbed per day will be 8 acres. It was also assumed that all on-road equipment used for the project will be year 2010 or newer models, and all construction equipment will meet California Air Resources Board Tier 4 requirements for off-road equipment.

Estimated criteria air pollutant emissions generated by the project’s construction and the applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District emissions thresholds are provided in Table 2.2.3-4. The project will not exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District thresholds for emissions during construction. In addition, construction activities will be temporary, lasting approximately 21 months, and will cease upon construction completion.

Table 2.2.3-4 Construction Emissions Predictions Summary Pollutants
Project
Construction
Emissions:

Tons Per
Construction Period
Project
Construction
Emissions:

Tons Per Year
San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District
Significance Thresholds
(Tons Per Year)
NOX 2.65 1.51 10
ROG 1.02 0.58 10
PM10 15.86 9.06 15
PM2.5 3.38 1.93 15
CO 19.70 11.26 100
SOX 0.04 0.02 27
Source: Dewberry, 2022.
477
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  27 In Table 2.2.3-4, the conversions are based on 1 ton per 21 months equals

0.047 tons per month, which equals 0.57 tons per year. Emissions are rounded to the nearest hundredth.

The best management practices listed in Section 1.6 will be implemented to further minimize construction emissions. The sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project site will experience a brief exposure period, no more than 24 months. This exposure period is less than the two-year exposure period typically assumed for health risk analysis for small construction projects and the three-year exposure period assumed for PM10 and carbon dioxide hotspot analysis.

The project will comply with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s rules and regulations and will implement construction best management practices, as described in Section 1.6. This will minimize construction-related emissions, which will not exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s thresholds as shown in Table 2.2.3-4.

Therefore, the project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a City of Clovis, County, or San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District air quality management plan, nor state goals and regulations. This impact is considered less than significant.

Project-related odor emissions will be mostly limited to the construction period. Odors will be generated from vehicles and/or equipment exhaust emissions during construction, and may be unpleasant in the immediately surrounding areas. Such odors will be temporary and will cease at the end of each workday (equipment exhaust), or upon completion of a construction phase (paving). Therefore, odors will not affect a substantial number of people for an extended period of time.

Operations of the project will not increase automobile capacity or create other permanent new sources of emissions. The project will encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation for residents, visitors, and employees of the major employment centers within the City of Clovis. Therefore, the project’s operations will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan, will not exceed air quality emissions thresholds, will not create a permanent increase in air pollutant emissions for sensitive receptors, or create any additional long-term air quality emissions or odors beyond what currently exists from the existing Enterprise Canal Trail, roadways, and land uses in the project vicinity. Impacts will be less than significant.

2.2.4 Biological Resources
Considering the information in the Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impact dated January 2017, and the Addendum to the Natural Environment Study- Minimal Impact dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:
478
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  28 Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Fisheries?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
No Impact
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact
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?
No Impact
Affected Environment
The biological study area is heavily disturbed and consists mostly of ruderal grassland, but also includes a small portion of pasture in the north, the State Route 168 corridor, and the Enterprise Canal; no natural communities are present. Aquatic features in the biological study area are limited to the Enterprise Canal, which flows northwesterly and is mostly concrete lined within the biological study area. The topography of the project site is relatively flat, sloping gently east to west and ranging from 390 to 395 feet above mean sea level.

Surveys and Record Searches
A general biological survey of the biological study area was conducted on foot by a certified biologist in September 2016. The naturally occurring vegetation in the biological study area was classified according to the California Native Plant Society’s A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. Dewberry conducted a site visit on November 2, 2022, to survey the revised biological study area. 479
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  29 Species lists were obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation website, the California Natural Diversity Database, and the California Native Plant Society Online Inventory.

Habitat Types
While no natural communities occur within the biological study area, other habitat types not considered natural include ruderal grassland, open water, pasture, and developed. Habitat types in the biological study area are summarized in Table 2.2.4-1.

Table 2.2.4-1 Natural Communities and Other Habitat Types in the Biological Study Area
Habitat Types Acres
Natural Communities—None 0
Other Habitat Types—Ruderal Grassland 7.07
Other Habitat Types—Open Water (Enterprise Canal) 0.75
Other Habitat Types—Pasture 1.27
Other Habitat Types—Developed 5.02
Total of All Habitat Types 14.11
Source: LSA Associates, 2017.

Ruderal Grassland
The ruderal grassland community is likely a former natural community that has been subject to regular disturbance and now has a large component of ruderal (weedy) species. The vegetation that grows in these areas are plant species that are able to quickly colonize and can grow in poor soil and in soil that is often disturbed. In the biological study area, ruderal grassland totals

7.07 acres and occurs north of State Route 168 and in the median. Dominant plant species include wild oats (Avena fatua), field mustard (Brassica rapa), and San Joaquin tarweed (Holocarpha obconica). Also present are Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), curly dock (Rumex crispus), Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum leporidum), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), and soft chess brome (Bromus hordeaceus).

The ruderal grassland community provides marginally suitable burrow and foraging habitat for the western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), suitable foraging habitat for the Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), and suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the California horned lark (Eremiphila alpestrisactia).

Open Water
The open water community within the biological study area consists of the Enterprise Canal. While open water is normally considered a natural community, the Enterprise Canal is an agricultural irrigation canal that functions and operates under strict management. Open water totals 0.75 acre within the biologocal study area.
480
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  30 Pasture
Pastureland, totaling 1.27 acres, is at the north end of the biological study area. The dominant plants in the community are wild oats, ripgut brome, and soft chess.

Developed Areas
The developed areas in the biological study area, totaling 5.02 acres, consist mainly of State Route 168 and the Enterprise Canal levees. A section of the Clovis Community Hospital complex is also present in the south end of the biological study area.

Plant and Wildlife Species
Plant Species
No state or federally listed, or proposed for listing, plant species occur in the biological study area. Many non-native species have been part of the California landscape for the past 150 years. The biological study area supports noxious weed species, including slender wild oats, ripgut brome, soft chess brome, yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), Mediterranean mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Italian ryegrass, Russian thistle, rose clover (Trifolium hirtum), and rattail fescue (Vulpia myuros). While most of these species are moderately invasive, one seriously invasive species—yellow star thistle—was found in the biological study area.

Wildlife Species
Three special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the biological study area: western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and California horned lark.

Mammals observed during the September 2016 survey include the California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) and cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.). Other common species likely to occur in the biological study area are the coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and opossum (Didelphis virginiana). No additional species were observed in 2022.

Bird species observed during the September 2016 survey include the mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), American crow (Corvus brachyrynchos), and barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). These species were either observed overhead or within trees directly in or adjacent to the biological study area. Other common bird species expected to occur in the biological study area are the red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), band-tailed pigeon (Columba fasciata), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), rock pigeon (Columba livia), American robin (Turdus migratorius), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). Several ground squirrel burrows of suitable size, piles of dirt, and debris were observed in the 481
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  31 ruderal grassland but no sign of western burrowing owl presence (such as whitewash, prey remains, etc.) was observed. No additional species were observed in 2022.

No amphibians or reptiles were observed during the September 2016 survey.

Amphibian species likely to occur in the biological study area are the Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris regilla) and California toad (Anaxyrus boreas halophilus). Reptile species likely to occur in the biological study area are the western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis elegans elegans), western rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus), common gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), and western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis). No additional species were observed in 2022.

Migration Corridor
Wildlife movement corridors are linear habitats that function to connect two or more areas of significant wildlife habitat. These corridors may function on a local level as links between small habitat patches (such as streams in urban settings) or may provide critical connections between regionally significant habitats (such as deer movement corridors). Wildlife corridors typically include vegetation and topography that facilitate the movements of wild animals from one area of suitable habitat to another to fulfill foraging, breeding, and territorial needs. These corridors often provide cover and protection from predators that may be lacking in surrounding habitats. Wildlife corridors generally include riparian zones and similar linear expanses of contiguous habitat.

The Enterprise Canal provides a minimally suitable migration corridor for wildlife. The canal levees provide a corridor for wildlife; however, the lack of vegetation, along with the State Route 168 crossing, reduces the likelihood of wildlife using the levees.

Aquatic Resources
The Enterprise Canal, totaling 0.75 acre, is the only aquatic feature within the biological study area. The Enterprise Canal flows northwesterly and is mostly concrete lined in the biological study area. The sections that are not concrete lined have mostly unvegetated, steep banks that appear to be maintained regularly via herbicide treatment. The section of the Enterprise Canal in the biological study area is a potential waters of the State or United States; however, it does not support wetlands.

Two other potential aquatic features—a Caltrans detention basin and roadside swales along State Route 168—were also evaluated; however, they were both determined not to support wetlands nor have a discernable ordinary high water mark. Therefore, they are not considered aquatic features for the purposes of the project.
482
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  32 Environmental Consequences (Questions a and d in table) No state or federally listed or proposed plant species occur in the biological study area; therefore, no impacts will occur as a result of implementing the project. The project has the potential to affect three special-status wildlife species: western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and California horned lark.

The ruderal grassland community provides marginally suitable burrow and foraging habitat for western burrowing owls, suitable foraging habitat for the Swainson’s hawk, and suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the California horned lark. Several ground squirrel burrows of suitable size, piles of dirt, and debris were observed in the ruderal grassland; however, no signs of western burrowing owl presence (such as whitewash, prey remains, etc.) were observed. No additional species were observed in 2022. Impacts are considered less than significant. The project will implement standard best management practices for species, such as preconstruction surveys.

Disturbance of migratory birds during their nesting season (February 1 to August 31) could result in “take,” which is prohibited under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code. The Fish and Game Code (Section 3503) also prohibits take or destruction of bird nests or eggs. Trees and shrubs in and adjacent to the project area could provide nesting or resting areas for migratory birds. The project will implement standard best management practices for migratory birds, such as preconstruction surveys. Impacts are considered less than significant.

During construction, the noise of the construction equipment could potentially deter wildlife from using the area, especially the Enterprise Canal and levees, for movement. However, construction activities will be temporary and activity will cease upon completion. Upon construction completion, the project will not change the use of the existing canal levees north and south of State Route 168, nor will it change the migration barrier that currently exists. Impacts are considered less than significant in this regard.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
BIO-1: The following measures shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts to western burrowing owls:
• Preconstruction surveys for the western burrowing owl shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in accordance with California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. • If no burrowing owls are detected during the preconstruction survey, no further action is required.
• If burrowing owls are identified during the preconstruction survey, passive exclusion shall be implemented per California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (including 483
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  33 avoidance of occupied burrows during the breeding season from February 1 to August 31).
• Following construction, all fill slopes, temporary impact and/or otherwise disturbed areas shall be restored to preconstruction contours (if necessary) and revegetated with the native seed mix specified in Table BIO-1a. Invasive exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable.

Table BIO-1a. Native Species Seed Mix
Scientific Name Common Name
Rate
(Pounds Per
Acre)
Minimum
Percent
Germination
Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort 2.0 50
Bromus carinatus California brome 5.0 85
Elymus trachycaulus Slender
wheatgrass

2.0 60
Elymus X triticum Regreen 10.0 80
Eschscholzia californica California poppy 2.0 70
Hordeum brachyantherum California barley 2.0 80
Lupinus bicolor Bicolored lupine 4.0 80
Source: LSA Associates, 2017.

BIO-2: The following measures shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts to the Swainson’s hawk:
• If work begins between February 1 and August 31, preconstruction surveys for Swainson’s hawks shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in accordance with the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee’s Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley.
• If nesting Swainson’s hawks are found within the survey area, a qualified biologist shall evaluate the potential for the project to disturb nesting activities. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be contacted to review the evaluation and determine if the project can proceed without adversely affecting nesting activities. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall also be consulted to establish protection measures such as buffers. Disturbance of active nests shall be avoided until it is determined by a qualified biologist that nesting is complete and the young have fledged, or that the nest has failed. If work is allowed to proceed, at a minimum, a qualified biologist shall be on‐site during the start of construction activities during the nesting season to monitor nesting activity. The monitor shall have the authority to stop work if it is determined the project is adversely affecting nesting activities. • Worker environmental awareness training will be conducted by a qualified biologist for all construction personnel. This training instructs workers to recognize Swainson’s hawks and their habitat(s).
484
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  34 • Brightly colored Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing (high-visibility fencing) shall be placed along the limits of work to prevent unnecessary encroachment into adjacent areas. Fencing shall be maintained in good condition, inspected weekly, for the duration of construction activities. • Following construction, all fill slopes, temporary impact and/or otherwise disturbed areas shall be restored to preconstruction contours (if necessary) and revegetated with the native seed mix specified in Table BIO-1a. Invasive exotic plants will be controlled to the maximum extent practicable.

BIO-3: The following measures shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts to the California horned lark:
• If construction begins during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a survey for nesting California horned larks shall be conducted within the biological study area by a qualified biologist. The survey shall be conducted a maximum of 14 days prior to the start of construction. • If nesting California horned larks are found within 100 feet of the project footprint during the survey, an initial setback of 100 feet from nesting areas shall be established and protected with Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing (high-visibility fencing). Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing shall be maintained, and inspected weekly, during the nesting season until construction is complete or the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist.
• A qualified biologist shall evaluate the potential for the work to disturb nesting activities considering the 100‐foot setback. The evaluation criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the location/orientation of the nest, the distance of the nest to the work limits, the line of sight between the nest and the work limits, and the description of the work.
• If the qualified biologist determines that the setback can be reduced, initial construction activities in the vicinity of the nest shall be monitored by a qualified biologist. If the biologist determines nesting is not affected by construction activities with the reduced setback, work can proceed. If it is determined that construction activities are adversely affecting the nesting birds with the reduced setback, all construction within 100 feet of a nest shall be halted until the biologist can establish an appropriate setback. • Worker environmental awareness training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for all construction personnel. The training shall instruct workers about the purpose of Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing (high-visibility fencing) and the resources being protected.

BIO-4: The following seasonal work restrictions will be implemented during construction to minimize the potential take of nesting birds:
485
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  35 • If work must begin during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat in the biological study area for presence of nesting birds. This survey shall occur no more than 10 days prior to the start of construction. If no nesting activity is observed, work may proceed as planned. If an active nest is discovered, a qualified biologist shall evaluate the potential for the project to disturb nesting activities. The evaluation criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the location/orientation of the nest in the nest tree, the distance of the nest from the biological study area, and line of sight between the nest and the biological study area.
• The California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be contacted if it is determined the project will adversely affect nesting activities. • If nesting birds are found, a qualified biologist shall be on‐site weekly during construction activities to monitor nesting activity. The biologist shall have the authority to stop work if it is determined the project is adversely affecting nesting activities.

2.2.5 Cultural Resources
Considering the information in the Historic Property Survey Report and associated Archaeological Survey Report, dated July 2017, and Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report, Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report and the Finding of No Adverse Effect, dated June 2023, the following significance deteminations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less Than Significant
Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
“Cultural resource” is a broad term that includes prehistoric, historic, and traditional cultural properties that reflect the physical evidence of past human activity across the landscape. Cultural resources, along with prehistoric and historic human remains and associated grave goods, must be considered under various federal, state, and local regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

Cultural resources that are listed on, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places are also considered eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources.
486
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  36 Record Searches
A literature search conducted by staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center of the California Historical Resources Inventory System was completed on October 26, 2016. A second literature search was conducted by the staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center of the California Historical Resources Inventory System in October 2022. The record search area encompassed the project area of potential effects and a 1/4-mile radius buffer (study area). The results of the record searches identified six cultural resources within the record search radius. In addition, the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center identified a segment of the C.Todd Clark Residence (P-10- 5017), C.Todd Clark Farm Complex (P-10-5820) and Enterprise Canal (P-10- 5934), as within the area of potential effects.

Pedestrian Surveys
A pedestrian (walk on foot) survey of the project area was conducted on November 13, 2016 for all undeveloped ground surface areas within the original area of potential effects boundaries. No archaeological resources, historic or prehistoric, were observed during the survey.

A second pedestrian survey was conducted on November 20, 2022 within the revised area of potential effects boundaries. During the survey, all areas that were not paved were surveyed in 5-meter-wide transects for cultural constituents. Constraints to the survey included urban hardscape and safety considerations given the proximity of the highway. No cultural constituents were encountered during the survey. No human or faunal remains, no prehistoric or historic artifacts (50 years or older), and no midden soils suggestive of human occupation were encountered.

A third pedestrian survey, focused on the built environment, was conducted on May 3, 2023. One historical resource—the Enterprise Canal—is within the area of potential effects and is assumed eligible for the purposes of this project with the Cultural Study Office concurrence.

Environment and Landscape
The landscape of the project area is characterized as a broad, low-relief alluvial plain, with an elevation of 345 feet above mean sea level, gradually declining northward to approximately 108 feet near the point at which Fresno, Madera, and Merced counties all meet. Wide and low-gradient alluvial fans form a piedmont zone at the eastern side of the valley where it borders the Sierra Nevada Mountains. To the west, alluvial fans originating in the Coast Range are in comparison short and steep. The two sets of fans cause the San Joaquin River to flow in an offset course to the west, as the waters are directed away from the valley’s center by the Sierra Nevada alluvial deposits.

Geologic mapping shows the entire project area of potential effects within the middle Pleistocene Riverbank Formation, which is estimated to be between 487
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  37 130,000 and 450,000 years old. Sediments consist of older and younger gravels from Riverbank depositions, in addition to alluvial silts that grade upward. The unit is capped by sands having a cobble conglomerate at the top. There are three members of the Riverbank Formation, but the lowest unit is not found near the area of potential effects.

Ethnography
Historically, the Yokuts people collectively inhabited the San Joaquin Valley as well as the eastern foothills of the Sierra Nevada from the Calaveras River southward to the Kern River. Ethnographers and linguists have traditionally divided Yokuts into three geographic groups, based on linguistic similarities and differences: Northern Valley, Southern Valley, and Foothill. The area of potential effects is somewhat closer to the area historically occupied by the Northern Valley Yokuts according to Kroeber, who suggested that they lived along the San Joaquin River. The territory of the northern Yokuts tribes extended southward from the Calaveras River to the upper San Joaquin River and from the crest of the Coast (Diablo) Range east to the Sierra Nevada foothills.

The Northern Valley Yokuts consisted of 11 or more tribes, each containing 300 or so people. Most members lived within a single settlement that often had the same name as the political unit. These were generally established on low rises along the major watercourses. The eastern side of the San Joaquin River was more heavily populated than the land to the west of the river, due to greater water availability. A village generally contained at least three types of structures—oval single-family dwellings made of tule, ceremonial chambers, and sweathouses.

The fundamental economy of the Yokuts was subsistence fishing, hunting, and collecting plant foods. Acorns, collected in the fall and then stored in granaries, were a staple food. During the fall and spring runs, salmon was a dietary mainstay. Wildfowl, such as geese and ducks, were also an important staple. Additional dietary plant parts included seeds, berries and tule roots.

Large game included deer, elk, antelope, and black bears.

A wide variety of tools, implements, and enclosures were used by the Northern Valley Yokuts to gather, collect, and process food resources. These included bow and arrows, nets, traps, slings, and blinds for hunting land mammals and birds; also used were harpoons, hooks, and nets, as well as tule rafts. Sharpened digging sticks and woven tools (seed beaters, burden baskets, and carrying nets) were used to collect plant resources and a variety of implements (stone mortars and pestles, bedrock and portable mortars, stone knives, and bone tools) were used for processing resources. The Northern Valley Yokuts traded with neighboring groups for bows and arrows, baskets, shell ornaments and beads, obsidian, and mussels and abalone.

The San Joaquin Valley was never settled during the Spanish and Mexican periods, but influences from the coastal missions and presidios were felt 488
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  38 inland by the late 1700s. By 1805, Northern Valley Yokuts were transported to the San José, Santa Clara, Soledad, San Juan Bautista, and San Antonio missions that were established during the Spanish era. Later, disease and military raids claimed many lives during the Mexican period, followed by displacement during the early American Period by gold seekers and farmers.

Prehistoric Setting
Paleoindian and Lower Archaic Periods (11,500-5,550 CAL B.C.) Few archaeological sites that predate 5,000 years ago have been discovered in the region. Near the end of the Pleistocene (approximately 9,050 cal B.C.) and during the early Middle Holocene (approximately 5,550 cal B.C.), there were periods of climate change and associated alluvial deposition throughout the central California lowlands. Recent geoarchaeological studies have verified that large segments of the Late Pleistocene landscape were removed or buried by periodic episodes of deposition or erosion during the Middle Holocene. This confirms hypotheses that Paleoindian and Lower Archaic sites were buried during the last 5,000 to 6,000 years by deposits of Holocene alluvium up to 10 meters thick along the lower stretches of the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River drainage systems.

Archaeological evidence for the Paleoindian Period is scant, composed mostly of fluted projectile points. The Lower Archaic Period is also mainly represented by isolated finds, such as at the Tulare Lake basin in the southern San Joaquin Valley. As a consequence of the natural alluvial deposition processes, only one site on the valley floor has produced cultural material dating to this period, and featured stone tools, remains of birds, fish and shellfish but no plant remains or milling tools. At two Lower Archaic Period sites in the foothills of Calaveras County, abundant handstones and milling slabs have been recovered.

Middle Archaic Period (5,550-550 CAL B.C.)
Middle Archaic Period archaeological sites are more common in the foothills, particularly in buried contexts between circa 4,050 and 2,050 cal B.C., and are relatively scarce on the valley floor due to burial by natural processes.

The change in climate and rising sea levels at the start of the Middle Holocene led to the development of the extensive marshland known as the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta.

The archaeological record indicates groups followed a seasonal foraging strategy and exploited a wide range of natural resources, including a variety of large and small mammals, fish, waterfowl, and plant resources. It is also likely that groups occupied higher elevations in the summer and shifted to lower elevations during the winter, and that residential stability along river corridors within the Central Valley increased during this period. Faunal remains recovered from Middle Archaic sites include tule elk, deer, pronghorn, and rabbits, while fish remains include salmon, sturgeon, and 489
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  39 smaller fishes. Seeds or acorns also formed an important part of the diet during this period, and milling implements found at sites include grinding slabs and handstones, as well as mortars and pestles.

Spears, angling hooks, composite bone hooks, and baked clay artifacts that may have been used as net or line sinkers represent the variety of fishing implements found at sites dating to this period. Other baked clay items include pipes and discoids, as well as cooking “stones.” Impressions of twined basketry, bone tools, shell beads, and ground and polished charmstones have also been recovered. A variety of grave goods accompanied burials in cemetery areas, which were separate from habitation areas.

The presence during the Middle Archaic of an established trade network is indicated by a variety of exotic cultural materials, including obsidian tools, quartz crystals, and Olivella shell beads.

Upper Archaic Period (550 CAL B.C.-CAL A.D. 1100)
The Upper Archaic Period features more specialized technology, with innovations and new types of bone tools, Olivella shell beads, Haliotis ornaments, charmstones, and ceremonial blades. An abundance of grinding tools (mortars and pestles) and plant remains, accompanied by a decrease in slab milling stones and handstones, indicates a shift to a greater reliance on acorns as a dietary staple during the Upper Archaic Period.

A wide variety of natural resources were exploited during this period.

Subsistence strategies varied regionally, focusing on seasonally available resources suited for harvesting in bulk, such as salmon, shellfish, deer, rabbits, and acorns. Numerous large shell mounds dating to this period are located near freshwater or saltwater and indicate exploitation of aquatic resources was relatively intensive. The accumulations of cultural debris and habitation features, such as rock-lined ovens, house floors, burials, hearths, and fire-cracked rock, reflect long-term residential occupation.

In the western margins of the San Joaquin Valley, discrete cemeteries date to the Upper Archaic Period. In the southern San Joaquin Valley, villages on the shores of Buena Vista Lake were occupied year-round. Trade in marine shell beads and obsidian, among other items, continued to be important.

Emergent/Late Prehistoric Period (CAL A.D. 1100-Historic Contact) The archaeological record in the Central Valley for the Emergent or Late Prehistoric Period documents an increase in the diversity and number of artifacts and in the number of archaeological sites. Along with an increase in sedentism (living in one place for a long time) and population that led to the development of social stratification, with an elaborate ceremonial and social organization, a number of cultural innovations shaped the Emergent Period.

These include the introduction of the bow and arrow and more diverse fishing equipment (bone fish hooks, harpoons, and gorge hooks). Fishing, hunting, 490
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  40 and gathering plant foods continue as the emphasis of subsistence practices, including intensive harvesting of acorns and an increased focus on fishing.

Hopper mortars and shaped mortars and pestles, as well as bone awls used for producing coiled baskets, are common. Locally made Cosumnes Brownware has been recovered from some sites in the lower Sacramento Valley, while pottery in the Tulare basin was obtained through trade. Baked clay balls, probably used for cooking in the absence of stone, remain common.

Ceremonial and ritual items include flanged tubular pipes and baked clay effigies representing humans and animals. Clamshell disk beads were used as currency and accompanied the development of extensive exchange networks. Mortuary practices included flexed burials, the cremation of high- status individuals, and pre-interment burning of offerings in grave pits.

Overall, the cultural patterns known from historic period Native American groups inhabiting the Central Valley are reflected in the subsistence and land use patterns practiced during the Emergent Period.

Local History
Fresno County was formed in 1856 from parts of Mariposa, Merced, and Tulare counties. Fresno is Spanish for “ash tree,” and it received the name in recognition of the abundance of the shrubby local Ash, Fraxinus dipetala, growing along the San Joaquin River.

Beginning with the 1850s Gold Rush, timber became an important economic resource for the county. The county’s first sawmill was constructed in the foothill mining district. Placer mining camps developed along the upper Fresno and San Joaquin rivers. By the late 1870s, a stage road that passed through Fresno Flats and Coarsegold had been constructed from Madera to Yosemite Valley.

After the Southern Pacific line of the Central Pacific Railroad was completed through the county in 1872, the ability to transport lumber long distances further fueled the regional economy. To meet the demand for lumber, and to facilitate the transportation of cut trees to the railroad, a 63-mile flume was constructed. During the 1880s, residents brought irrigation, electricity, and extensive agriculture to the Fresno area. Moses Church developed the first canals, called “Church Ditches,” for irrigation. These canals allowed extensive cultivation of wheat. Francis Eisen, leader of the wine industry in Fresno County, also began the raisin industry in 1875. A.Y. Easterby and Clovis Cole (also known as the “Wheat King of the Nation”) developed extensive grain and cattle ranches. In more recent times, cotton became a major crop in Fresno and the southern San Joaquin Valley, but recent drought and lower demand have lessened cotton’s importance to the local economy. The discovery of oil in the western part of the county, near the town of Coalinga at the foot of the Coast Ranges, brought about an economic boom in the 1900s.

By 1910, Coalinga Oil Field was the most productive oil field in California. 491
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  41 Clovis began in 1881, as a conscious effort by residents of Fresno. These people raised the sum of $100,000 to build a freight stop along the San Joaquin Valley Railroad to bring products from the eastern part of the valley onward. Clovis became an important lumber milling center, which brought with it jobs, retail and other businesses. The town was incorporated in 1912.

Clovis founder Marcus Pollasky proposed that the railroad should go through the area and was instrumental in raising funds for the Clovis rail stop. The keys to Clovis’ growth were both the railroad and a 42-mile-long log flume, the Shaver Lake (or Fresno Lumber) Flume, which led down from the Sierra Nevada Mountains at Shaver Lake toward Clovis.

Project Area History
Aerial photographs going back to 1962 and historic topographic maps dating back to 1923 show the area of potential effects as rural and occupied by farms although, in recent years, surrounding areas have been developed with large roads and suburban housing tracts. The biggest recent changes to the area of potential effects were the construction of State Route 168 between 1998 and 2002, along the right-of-way formerly occupied by Tollhouse Road, the development of the Clovis Research and Technology Park at the eastern boundary of the area of potential effects around 1998, and the construction of the Clovis Community Hospital complex to the south of the area of potential effects around 1988.

Historically, the area of potential effects was occupied by a portion of the 3,200-acre ranch belonging to the Wesley Potter family. Potter, like other ranchers of the area in this period, was a sheepherder and claimed the land in the 1870s. However, the nature of Potter’s agricultural business changed after 1875, when the then-newly built Enterprise Canal changed hands due to a water rights lawsuit won by the Fresno Canal and Irrigation Company. The latter company leased irrigation rights to the landowners along the route of the Enterprise Canal. Access to water made it possible for Potter and others to switch from raising sheep on the dry plain to growing grain and grapes for raisins, in addition to planting fruit orchards.

In the early 1900s, Potter started leasing his property and, by 1913, had either sold his lands or deeded them to his wife and daughters. The economy of this area also changed toward the end of the nineteenth century after the construction of the Fresno Lumber Flume, whose operation required substantial manpower to clear log jams and repair the constantly leaking structure. On the north side of what is now State Route 168, an earlier cultural resources study discovered the remains of the Reverend C. Todd Clark farm complex, adjacent to the project’s area of potential effects. Clark married one of Potter’s daughters and moved into the home in 1920. The family farm produced a variety of fruits and raised livestock. Irrigation water for their, as well as the Potter, farm was taken from the nearby Enterprise Canal. 492
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  42 The Enterprise Canal is 36.5 miles long and sits within the cities of Fresno and Clovis in Fresno County. It was constructed in multiple stages beginning in the late nineteenth century to irrigate agricultural land in the northeast areas of Fresno and Clovis. The head gate is located on the Gould Canal, which is near central Fresno and is fed from the Kings River. The Enterprise Canal empties into Herndon Canal in north Fresno.

The Enterprise Canal is currently part of the Fresno Irrigation District. The earliest known parent company to construct the Enterprise Canal was the Enterprise Canal Company, which eventually sold the canal to the Fresno Canal Irrigation Company (also known as the Fresno Canal and Land Corporation), which became the Fresno Irrigation District in 1921.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, and c in the table) Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource, or its immediate surroundings, such that the significance will be materially impaired. The C. Todd Clark Residence (P-10-5017) and C. Todd Clark Farm Complex (P-10-5820) were identified by the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center as within the area of potential effects. However, the C.Todd Clark Residence (P-10-5017) is included as part of the C.Todd Clark Farm Complex (P-10-5820), and the location for C.Todd Clark Residence (P- 10-5017) is incorrectly mapped on the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center geographic information systems record search results map and is actually located outside of the area of potential effects; the location was verified by field observations. The C.Todd Clark Farm Complex (P-10-5820) is outside the project area of direct impact.

A segment of the Enterprise Canal (P-10-5934) is within the area of potential effects. This resource is assumed eligible for the National Register of Historic Places for the purposes of this project, so it is considered a historic resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Enterprise Canal is significant because of its association with important historical events and trends, such as agriculture, of Fresno County.

The Enterprise Canal is outside of the project’s area of direct impact. The project will conform to the area along the canal levee vicinity, south of State Route 168, but will avoid the canal itself. Excavation will be minimal and will not result in a physical impact to the canal. Potential impacts to the Enterprise Canal from heavy equipment use and pile driving during construction could result in physical destruction or damage to the structure through vibration. However, the construction contract will include the 2013 Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, requiring conditions and vibrational restrictions to avoid impacts to the historic resource. Therefore, the project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, and there will be a less than significant impact on historical resources. 493
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  43 No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed within or adjacent to the area of potential effects during the background research or observed during the pedestrian surveys on November 13, 2016 and November 20, 2022. The area of potential effects has a low potential to encounter buried archaeological deposits during construction.

Geoarchaeological research indicates that the probability of discovery of buried archaeological deposits in the underlying sediments is very low because the soils are mapped as Pleistocene and predate human arrival.

Therefore, the likelihood of encountering previously undocumented buried archaeological deposits in the project site is considered low, and project impacts are considered less than significant. Nonetheless, there remains a chance that construction activities associated with the project could result in unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources; therefore, avoidance and minimzation measure CUL-1 has been provided in the event of an unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources during construciton.

No formal cemeteries or human remains were identified during the field investigation, and no burial sites are likely to be encountered during construction activities. Project impacts are less than significant. However, in the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains during construciton, avoidance and minimization measure CUL-1 has been provided.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
CUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. Depending on the nature of the find, a qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric or historic archaeology, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, as necessary:
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required.
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the lead agency. If the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historic Resources, the lead agency shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agency, through consultation as appropriate, determines either (1) that the site is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historic Resources, or (2) that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.
494
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  44 • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, he or she shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (Assembly Bill 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the Fresno County Coroner (in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 will be implemented.
• If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant for the project (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The designated Most Likely Descendent will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the Most Likely Descendant, the Native American Heritage Commission can mediate (Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). This will also include either recording the site with the Native American Heritage Commission or the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement, or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (Assembly Bill 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

2.2.6 Energy
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated May 2018 and the Energy section of the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference dated January 2023, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact
Affected Environment
In 1975, the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill 1575 in response to the oil crisis of the 1970s. Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Appendices F and G require a 495
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  45 description of the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy caused by a project. Both sources aim to focus on conservation of energy by ensuring projects consider the efficiency of energy use.

Energy resources include electricity, natural gas, fossil fuels, and other fuels.

The production of electricity requires the consumption or conversion of energy stored in natural resources such as water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar radiation, certain minerals (for nuclear power), and geothermal energy. Production of energy and energy use both result in pollution and depletion of these renewable and nonrenewable resources. The use of energy from transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project is currently caused by vehicles traveling on Tollhouse Road, Medical Center Drive, State Route 168, North Temperance Avenue, and Owens Mountain Parkway.

Pacific Gas and Electric is the main provider of electric service and natural gas in the City of Clovis. According to the California Energy Commission, the total estimated usage for both residential and non-residential uses for Fresno County was approximately 8,017 million kilowatt hours in 2020. Of the 8,017 million kilowatt hours consumed, approximately 3,101 million kilowatt hours were from residential use and approximately 4,916 million kilowatt hours were from non-residential use. The California Energy Commission does not provide approximate energy usage data for only the City of Clovis.

Environmental Consequences (Question a in table)
Temporary increases in energy use may occur during construction because traffic control and lane closures may increase travel time for the motor vehicles on nearby roadways, including the State Route 168/Owens Mountain Parkway intersection, State Route 168/North Temperance Avenue interchange, Owens Mountain Parkway, and Tollhouse Road.

Energy in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel will be consumed by large construction equipment and worker vehicles during the construction period.

During construction, workers will commute to the construction site; however, workers are anticipated to come from the City of Clovis and surrounding communities. Diesel equipment will be used during construction; however, compliance with federal, state, and local regulations (for example, limit engine idling times, require the recycling of construction debris) will reduce short- term energy demand during the project’s construction. All standard best management practicess to minimize energy waste will be implemented to limit idling times and require equipment to meet current standards. Construction of the project will not result in wasteful or inefficient use of energy. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.

The project will improve connectivity of the pedestrian and bicycle network in the City of Clovis, as identified and planned for in the City of Clovis General Plan, City of Clovis Active Transportation Plan, Fresno County Regional Trails Plan, Fresno County Regional Bicycle and Recreational Trails Master Plan, Fresno 496
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  46 County Active Transportation Plan, and Fresno Council of Governments’ Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. The project will not induce changes such that the surrounding land uses will be altered beyond what is currently planned by the City of Clovis and County.

The project will not result in the increase of roadway capacity, increase in average daily travel, or increase of vehicle miles traveled. Rather, the project will provide facilities to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation between the commercial and residential areas to the north of State Route 168 and the Clovis Community Hospital complex and residential areas to the south. The project’s intent is to reduce average daily travel and vehicle miles traveled through conversion of these trips to bicycle or pedestrian trips for residents, visitors, commuters, and patrons of the Clovis Community Hospital complex.

Lighting will be required for the project along the path; however, the lighting will meet federal and state requirements for energy efficiency. In addition, the electricity required for the lighting will come from the existing grid and will not result in an increase in energy needs beyond what the existing electrical grid provides.

Therefore, the project will not create new energy demand from operation nor will it require the creation of new energy sources. Impacts will be less than significant.

2.2.7 Geology and Soils
Considering the information in the California Geological Survey’s Geological Map of California accessed January 2023, the California Geological Survey Fault Activity Map of California accessed January 2023, University of California Museum of Paleontology collections database received January 2023, 2017 Paleontological Identification Report, Natural Environment Study- Minimal Impact dated January 2017, and the Addendum to the Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impact dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project CEQA Determination
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.

Less Than Significant
Impact
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact
497
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  47 Question – Would the project CEQA Determination
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
No Impact
iv) Landslides? No Impact
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
Less Than Significant
Impact
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?
No Impact
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? Less Than Significant
Impact
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
No Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
Geology and Seismicity
The project is in the City of Clovis in Fresno County, within the San Joaquin Valley; the foothills of the Sierra Nevada begin east of the City of Clovis. The San Joaquin Valley is the southernmost of two valleys that make up the Great Valley geomorphic province, an alluvial plain approximately 400 miles long and 50 miles wide. The San Joaquin Valley consists of several thousand feet of marine and non-marine sedimentary rock derived from erosion of the Coast Ranges to the west and the Sierra Nevada to the east over the last 200 million years. The topography in the project area is relatively flat, sloping gently east to west and ranging from 390 to 395 feet above mean sea level.

The project lies in the geological map unit Qoa. This unit includes older alluvium, lake, playa, and terrace deposits.

The potential for seismic ground shaking in California is expected. As a result, the State requires special design considerations for all structures in accordance with the seismic design provisions in the California Building Code. The City of Clovis, and therefore the project site, sits within Seismic Zone 3. According to the California Geological Survey, Seismic Zone 3 is an area that can expect to experience ground motion of low severity.

The project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone and is not on a known fault. The Clovis Fault, the nearest fault to the project area, is approximately 2 miles northeast. The Clovis Fault is not mapped as active; it is mapped as showing no recognized displacement in the Quaternary 498
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  48 Period, that is, within the last 1.6 million years. There are no other faults within 50 miles of the project site.

Soils
There are two types of soils present in the project site: Ramona sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes; and San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. Most of the project site is composed of Ramona sandy loam. This series is composed of well-drained soils that have predominantly sandy loam subsoil and are found on low alluvial terraces. This is a typically well-drained soil with subsoil that has a moderately slow permeability. Ramona sandy loam is not considered a hydric soil.

San Joaquin loam is found in the northern portions of the project site and is known to have a very slow permeability; however, the water-holding capacity is commonly low due to the small clayey horizon over the hardpan. Although a hardpan is associated with this soil type, San Joaquin loam is not considered a hydric soil.

Paleontology
Paleontological resources are the fossilized evidence of organisms preserved in the geological (rock) record. Fossils are considered non-renewable resources that are protected by federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

Sedimentary rocks, and some volcanic and metamorphic rocks, have the potential to yield significant fossiliferous deposits. The paleontological potential can initially be assessed by determining the age of surficial and underlying geologic materials associated with sediments that will be disturbed during construction of a project. As determined from geologic maps of the project area, geologic materials underlying the footprint of the project are identified as the Pleistocene Riverbank Formation. These sediments consist of an upper layer of hardpan that is underlain by a coarse-grained channel and overbank deposits. According to an evaluation conducted by the University of California Museum of Paleontology, no fossil localities were identified within a 5-mile radius of the project. Based on the 2017 Paleontological Identification Report prepared by the City of Clovis by Cogstone Resource Management, Incorporated, excavation associated with the project has low potential to encounter scientifically significant fossils.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, d, and f in the table) The project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone and is not on a known fault; therefore, fault rupture will not occur within the project site.

As mentioned above, the nearest fault, the Clovis Fault, is approximately 2 miles northeast of the project and is mapped as not active. The City of Clovis is in Seismic Zone 3, which is considered an area of relatively low severity of ground shaking. The project will bring construction workers to the site; however, it is anticipated that these workers will come from the City of Clovis 499
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  49 and surrounding areas. Therefore, construction of the project will not increase the number of people exposed to seismic events. Upon construction completion, the project will improve connectivity for active transportation to the north and south of State Route 168. The bridge structure spanning State Route 168 will meet current structural and geometric standards, including the current Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria and California Building Code.

Soil types present at the project site are not characteristic of moderate or severe soil erosion potential. The project will comply with federal, state, and local rules, regulations, and requirements. The project will implement best management practices pertaining to erosion control prevention. Best management practices could include the use of temporary large sediment barriers and fiber rolls to prevent the loss of topsoil. In addition, the project will develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Construction permit.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Web Soil Survey, both soil types present in the project site—Ramona sandy loam and San Joaquin loam—are in hydrologic soil group C. Soils in this group have moderately high runoff potential when thoroughly wet and typically have between 20 and 40 percent clay. Also, soils with moderately high to high expansion potential are located outside of City of Clovis limits, north and east of the project site in the City of Clovis’ non-sphere of influence Plan Area. The project site is within the City of Clovis limits and therefore can be expected to not have moderate or high expansion potential. The project is within an area of existing roadways and buildings (residential and commercial), so it will not increase the risk of life or property beyond what already exists.

The project is within geologic unit Qoa, a Pleistocene-age geologic formation made up of older alluvium, lake, playa and terrace deposits. According to an evaluation conducted by the University of California Museum of Paleontology, no fossil localities were identified within a 5-mile radius of the project. Based on the 2017 Paleontological Identification Report prepared by the City of Clovis by Cogstone Resource Management, Incorporated, excavation associated with the project has low potential to encounter scientifically significant fossils. The project site is considered to have low sensitivity for paleontological resources, so the project will result in less than significant impacts. Nonetheless, there remains a chance that construction activities associated with the project could result in unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources; therefore, avoidance and minimization measure GEO-1 has been provided in the event of an unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources during construction.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
GEO-1: If paleontological resources are discovered during earth-moving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work in the vicinity of the find and shall notify Caltrans, the City of Clovis Public Works Department, 500
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  50 and the City of Clovis Planning Department. The City of Clovis shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a mitigation plan in accordance with the most recent Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines. The mitigation plan will include, but is not limited to, a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum storage coordination for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings, depending on the resources identified during construction. Recommendations determined by the qualified paleontologist and the City of Clovis, based on the resources identified, will be implemented before construction activities can resume in the vicinity of the paleontological discovery.

2.2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Considering the information in the Air Quality Technical Memorandum dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project CEQA Determination
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
Human activities generate greenhouse gases consisting primarily of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, tetrafluoromethane, hexafluoroethane, sulfur hexafluoride, various hydrofluorocarbons, halocarbons, and ozone. Carbon dioxide is the most abundant greenhouse gas; while it is a naturally occurring and necessary component of Earth’s atmosphere, fossil-fuel combustion is the main source of additional, human-generated carbon dioxide that is the main driver of climate change. In the United States and in California, transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, mostly carbon dioxide.

These greenhouse gases trap solar radiation and the Earth’s own radiation, preventing it from passing through the Earth’s atmosphere and into space, resulting in the “greenhouse effect.” Greenhouse gases are vital to life on Earth since they help keep our planet a suitable temperature; however, increasing greenhouse gas concentrations are causing an increase in average global temperatures. In general, methane has 21 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide has 310 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide equivalent represents carbon dioxide plus the additional warming potential from methane and nitrous oxide.

The common unit of measurement for carbon dioxide equivalent is metric tons. As the average temperature of the Earth increases, climate patterns may be affected, including changes in precipitation patterns and storm 501
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  51 intensity, accumulation of snowpack, and intensity and duration of spring snowmelt, as well as intensity in low precipitation and droughts. Human-made greenhouse gas emissions occur mostly through the combustion of fuels, mainly associated with transportation, residential energy, and agriculture.

California’s main legislation for reducing greenhouse gas emissions is the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32), which set a goal for the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent of 1990 emission levels by 2050. The California Air Resources Board, among other state agencies, has enacted regulations to achieve these targets. In 2008, the California Air Resources Board adopted a Climate Change Scoping Plan, which contained strategies to achieve reduction of approximately 21.7 percent from the State’s projected 2020 carbon dioxide equivalent emission levels under a business-as-usual scenario. In December 2022, the California Air Resources Board finalized the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, which lays out a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels no later than 2045, as directed by Assembly Bill 1279.

The project is within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District boundaries. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has primary responsibility for compliance with the federal and state standards (listed in Tables 2.2.3-1 and 2.2.3-2, in Section 2.2.3, Air Quality) for greenhouse gas emissions. In 2008, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District adopted its Climate Change Action Plan, which includes guidance for determining significance of greenhouse gas emissions; projects implementing any combination of best management practices, also known as best practice standards, and/or demonstrating a total 29 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from business-as-usual, will be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for greenhouse gas emissions.

Furthermore, such projects will not require quantification of project-specific greenhouse gas emissions. Projects not implementing best management practices will require quantification of project-specific greenhouse gas emissions and demonstration of at least a 29 percent reduction/mitigation in greenhouse gas emissions from business-as-usual to reach determination of a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for greenhouse gases.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District is currently in federal and state non-attainment for ozone. As shown in Table 2.2.3-3, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has prepared plans to address regional non- attainment for ozone. The City of Clovis has not adopted a qualified greenhouse gases reduction plan; however, the Fresno Council of Governments adopted its second Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy in 2018 to achieve the regional per capita passenger vehicle greenhouse gas reduction targets of Senate Bill 375. In 2019, the California Air Resouces Board accepted the Fresno Council of Governments’ determination that the second Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy will achieve the region’s 502
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  52 greenhouse gas target of 10 percent per capita reduction by 2035 relative to 2005 levels when implemented.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a and b in table) Greenhouse gas emissions impacts on non-capacity-increasing projects like the project, a bicycle/pedestrian Class 1 overcrossing spanning State Route 168, are considered less than significant under the California Environmental Quality Act because there will be no increase in operational emissions.

However, construction activities, such as site preparation, site grading, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew will produce emissions from various sources. During project construction, greenhouse gases will be emitted through the operation of construction equipment, from worker vehicles, and from supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically uses fossil-based fuels to operate.

Under guidance from the City of Clovis and Caltrans, construction emissions were estimated using the Road Construction Emissions Model by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, which is the accepted model for roadway projects throughout California. The project’s construction activity will result in a maximum of 23,328 pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent emitted per day, for a total of approximately 1,955 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent over the 21-month construction period. The project will implement best management practices, as listed in Section 1.6, during construction activities. Therefore, equipment efficiency will be maximized during the construction phase.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District does not have specific thresholds for construction; however, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s Climate Change Action Plan states that projects implementing any combination of best management practices will be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the project will be consistent with local and state policies, rules, and regulations. Construction emissions will cease upon construction completion.

2.2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Considering the information in the Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment dated November 2016, and the Addendum to the Initial Site Assessment dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant
Impact
503
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  53 Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
c) 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
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?
No Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two nautical 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
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant
Impact
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact
Affected Environment
The Initial Site Assessment and Addendum Initial Site Assessment identify Recognized Environmental Conditions for the project site. Recognized Environmental Condtions are defined by the American Society for Testing Materials Practice E 1527-05 as: the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. Database reports were obtained from Environmental Data Resources, Incorporated, consisting of information compiled from various government records, such as Geotracker, National Priorities List, and EnviroStor, for information regarding the project area.

Based on the results of the record review, there are no Recognized Environmental Conditions within the project site.

The project site is in a developed area, surrounded by commercial and residential areas to the north of State Route 168 and the Clovis Community Hospital complex and residential areas to the south of State Route 168, transportation corridors that cross the project (State Route 168 and Tollhouse Road), and the Enterprise Canal. There was no evidence of Recognized Environmental Conditons, controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions, 504
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  54 or historical Recognized Environmental Conditions during the site reconnaissance completed in October 2016. No new or significant Recognized Environmental Conditions materials were identified during the site reconnaissance completed in November 2022.

In November 2022, trash/debris was identified within the project area. No storage structures/pipelines were found, except for a drainage basin north of State Route 168 and a transformer on a utility pole south of State Route 168 and east of the Enterprise Canal, outside of the project site. Therefore, there is potential for polychlorinated biphenyls in the project area. Utility poles and street sign poles have treated wood, and therefore there is the potential for treated wood that contains metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbons to occur within the project area.

Because of the age of the roadways in the project vicinity, and the presence of paint striping used on the roadways, there is the potential for lead-based paint to be present. Also, areas adjacent to roadways heavily used prior to 1978 could potentially contain aerially deposited lead due to the use of leaded gasoline additive during this time. State Route 168 through Clovis was constructed in approximately 2000 to 2002; however, Tollhouse Road, which parallels State Route 168, has been in use for many years prior to the 1980s.

No previous aerially deposited lead studies have been conducted for this area; therefore, lead levels are not known.

The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration requires that all thermal systems insulation, surfacing materials, and resilient flooring materials installed prior to 1981 be considered Presumed Asbestos- Containing Materials and treated accordingly. There are no structures on the project site, and therefore Asbestos-Containing Materials are not considered to be present. In addition, the project is not within an area known for naturally occurring asbestos in the soils.

One Envirostor site is adjacent to the northeast side of the project site: the Caltrans District 6/Harry Wilmoth Construction site. However, the status of the site is listed as “Completed – Case Closed” as of 1999. There is one CA HIST CORTESE site within approximately a half-mile of the project site. Based on a review of the available data posted on the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker website, this case has been closed. There is no evidence to suggest that possible soil or groundwater contamination from the CA HIST CORTESE site may impact the project site.

The nearest airport to the project area is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport in Fresno County, approximately 11 miles southwest of the project site.

The project site is in a Local Responsibility Area, designated as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
505
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  55 Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, c, and f in the table) Construction of the project will potentially require the use of various types and quantities of hazardous materials. Although the equipment used during construction activities could contain various hazardous materials, these materials will be used in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications and all applicable regulations. Minor fuel or oil spills could occur during construction activities. The release, even if accidental, of hazardous materials into the environment is regulated through existing federal, state, and local laws. These regulations require emergency response from local agencies to contain hazardous materials in the event of an accidental release. The use and handling of hazardous materials during construction activities will occur in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, including the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements.

Implementation of construction best management practices, compliance with vehicle manufacturer’s specifications, and compliance with applicable regulations will result in impacts that are less than significant.

Nonethless, construction of the project could result in the disturbance of hazardous materials, including lead-based paint, aerially deposited lead, and Polychlorinated biphenyls and Treated Wood Waste. Therefore, avoidance and minimization measures are provided in the event of disturbance of hazardous materials for lead-based paint (HAZ-1), aerially deposited lead (HAZ-1 and HAZ-2), and Polychlorinated biphenyls and Treated Wood Waste (HAZ-1 and HAZ-3).

The project will not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan through the implementation of the Construction Period Emergency Access Plan. The Construction Period Emergency Access Plan will be coordinated with the Clovis Police Department, Clovis Fire Department, Fresno County Sheriff’s Department, Fresno County Fire Protection Division, California Highway Patrol, and other emergency service providers within the area. Impacts during construction will be less than significant.

Upon construction completion, the project will not be a facility that generates or emits hazardous materials upon construction completion and project impacts are considered less than significant. Operations of the project will not be used by motor vehicles that often carry hazardous material. The potential for release of hazardous materials into the environment will be similar to existing conditions, and impacts will be less than significant. In addition, implementation of the project will have no long-term impacts on an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan because operations on adjacent roadways will remain the same as existing conditions.
506
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  56 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
HAZ-1: Lead-Containing Materials. A California-licensed abatement contractor will conduct a survey for lead-containing materials prior to construction activities (including the demolition of concrete or asphalt elements). If lead-containing materials are found, the following will be required:
• Building materials associated with paint on structures and paint on utilities should be abated by a California-licensed abatement contractor and disposed of as a hazardous waste in compliance with Standard Special Provision 14-11.13 and other federal and state regulations for hazardous waste.
• A Lead Compliance Plan should be prepared by the contractor for the disposal of lead-based paint. The grindings (which consist of the roadway material and the yellow and white color traffic stripes) shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with Standard Special Provision 36-4 (Residue Containing High Lead Concentration Paints). In addition, the Lead Compliance Plan will also contain the following provision to address aerially deposited lead: Standard Special Provision 7-1.02 k (6)(J)(iii) – Earth Material Containing Lead.
• A California-licensed lead contractor should be required to perform all work that will disturb any lead-based paint as a result of planned or unplanned renovations in the project area, including the presence of yellow traffic striping and pavement markings that may contain lead-based paint. All such material must be removed and disposed of as a hazardous material in compliance with Standard Special Provision 14-11.12.

HAZ-2: Aerially Deposited Lead and Other Heavy Metals. The following actions are recommended for handling and disposal of soils that contain an elevated level of aerially deposited lead or other heavy metals prior to ground- disturbing activities:
• A California-licensed abatement contractor will sample and test a representative sample of soils at the project site for hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead and other heavy metals. Representative samples of exposed shallow soils shall be collected at multiple locations along the project site and analyzed for total lead and extractable lead concentrations. • If hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead or other heavy metals are found in the soils at the project site, the following will be required:
o Removal, disposal, storage and transportation of materials contaminated with hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead or other heavy metals shall be performed in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, including but not limited to requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board and California Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality control plans and waste discharge permits, California Department of Fish and Wildlife permit 507
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  57 requirements for contaminated soil, and all requirements of the applicable Air Quality Management District and/or the Air Pollution Control District.
o Removal, disposal, storage, and transportation of materials contaminated with hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead or other heavy metals shall be performed in compliance with the Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead-Contaminated Soils between Caltrans and the Department of Toxic Substances Control, if the project site is within the state right-of-way or Caltrans is acting as direct oversight for the project.

HAZ-3: The timber associated with utility poles with mounted transformers or containing metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbons will be removed and disposed at a Regional Water Quality Control Board-certified treated wood waste landfill.

2.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Considering the information in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Flood Insurance Rate Maps accessed December 2022, Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impact dated January 2017, and the Addendum to the Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impact dated November 2022, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface water or groundwater quality?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant
Impact
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-site or off-site;
Less Than Significant
Impact
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on-site or off-site;
Less Than Significant
Impact
(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
Less Than Significant
Impact
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact
508
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  58 Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
The project is in the Academy hydrologic area, which is part of the larger South Valley Floor hydrologic unit of the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region (see Figure 2.2.10-1). Within the project area, the Enterprise Canal is the only aquatic feature. A stormwater drainage basin is within the project area, adjacent to Enterprise Canal.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Map has the project site within Zone X (areas determined to be outside of the 100- and 500-year floodplains), and adjacent to Zone A (areas inundated by 100- year flooding, for which no Base Flood Elevations have been established).

The project is not in a tsunami or seiche inundation hazard zone.

Groundwater recharge within the City of Clovis occurs both naturally and artificially. The Fresno Irrigation District provides surface water to the City of Clovis, primarily from the Kings River. The City of Clovis uses this resource to recharge groundwater, develop potable water, and directly irrigate City of Clovis parks. Wastewater recycling facilities and surface water treatment facilities also recharge the City of Clovis’ groundwater supply, including the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and Clovis’ Surface Water Treatment Plant. The project site is not within an active groundwater recharge area.

The project site is in an urban setting, with relatively flat topography, impervious surfaces, and major roadways. Two soil types are in the project area: Ramona sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, and San Joaquin loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. Neither of the soil units is listed as hydric or as having hydric inclusions.
509
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  59 Figure 2.2.10-1 Hydrology

510
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  60 Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, c, and e in the table) Construction activities will result in ground disturbance adjacent to the Enterprise Canal and a drainage basin that is within the northern portion of the project area, east of the Enterprise Canal and north of State Route 168.

Large and heavy pieces of construction equipment could compress soils within the project area, which could lead to a reduction in soil permeability and an increase in project site runoff. Indirect impacts could result from increased sedimentation rates if fine sediment is discharged into the Enterprise Canal or drainage basin during construction. Increased sedimentation may adversely affect water quality and channel substrate composition. Construction materials such as asphalt, concrete, and equipment fluids could be exposed to precipitation and subsequent runoff. If precautions are not taken to contain contaminants, construction could produce contaminated stormwater runoff (nonpoint source pollution), a major contributor to the degradation of water quality. The project will comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan prior to initiating construction activities. The best management practices listed in Section 1.6 will be implemented during project construction.

Construction activities may require the use of water for dust control or other activities. Water used during construction will be trucked to the project site, so no groundwater will be used. Construction activities will not intercept or alter groundwater recharge, discharge, or flow conditions. Water use at the project site will cease upon construction completion. Therefore, the project will not substantially decrease water supply or reduce groundwater recharge. The increase of impervious surfaces by less than 2 acres covering the length of the project will be negligible in association with groundwater recharge because the project is in an urban area with compacted and disturbed soils.

The project will not alter the course of a water body, nor will it alter the existing site drainage pattern. The project will comply with federal, state, and City of Clovis’ requirements and will implement best management practices pertaining to stormwater runoff and erosion control prevention through the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. Temporary construction areas will be revegetated. The project will have a less than significant impact related to stormwater runoff, erosion, or siltation on-site or off-site.

2.2.11 Land Use and Planning
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018 and the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, the following significance determinations have been made:
511
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  61 Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
No Impact

2.2.12 Mineral Resources
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018 and the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the
residents of the state?
No Impact
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?
No Impact

2.2.13 Noise
Considering the information in the Noise Technical Memorandum dated Janaury 2023, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant
Impact
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 nautical 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
Affected Environment
Noise is defined as an unwanted sound, and therefore is a subjective reaction to characteristics of a physical phenomenon. A logarithmic scale is used to describe sound pressure level, in terms of decibels. The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. An “A- weighted” sound level (expressed in units of A-weighted decibels [dBA]) can be computed by weighting sound levels of individual frequency bands by the 512
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  62 human sensitivity to those frequencies. Table 2.2.13-1 describes typical A- weighted noise levels for different activities. It is widely accepted that, in typical noise environments, people can detect changes in sound level at 3 A- weighted decibels or greater, while changes of 1 to 2 A-weighted decibels are generally not perceived. A 5 A-weighted decibel change is generally perceived as distinctly noticeable.

Table 2.2.13-1. Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels

Existing Conditions
The immediate vicinity of the project consists of a mix of commercial and residential areas to the north of State Route 168 and the Clovis Community Hospital complex and residential areas south of State Route 168. Currently, the Enterprise Canal Trail runs along the Enterprise Canal; however, State Route 168 and Tollhouse Road cause a break in the trail. The existing noise environment in the project area is dominated by roadway noise from State 513
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  63 Route 168, Owens Mountain Parkway, North Temperance Avenue, Medical Center Drive, and Tollhouse Road.

Sensitive noise receptors include, but are not limited to, the following land use categories: residences, schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, and nursing homes. Sensitive receptors within 200 feet of the project area are south of State Route 168 and include rural single-family homes and the Clovis Community Hospital complex (medical offices). Within the Clovis Community Hospital complex, the closest building is approximately 65 feet southwest of the project area. The closest single-family home is on North Locan Avenue, approximately 60 feet southeast of the project area and east of the Enterprise Canal. Sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 2.2.13-1.

North of State Route 168 is a preschool/daycare facility—Kids Kare Owens Ranch—on Owens Mountain Parkway, west of the Enterprise Canal, and approximately 430 feet northwest of the project area. This sensitive receptor is not shown on Figure 2.2.13-1 because it is more than 200 feet from the project area.

514
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  64 Figure 2.2.13-1 Sensitive Receptors

515
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  65 Environmental Consequences (Questions a and b in the table) Noise and vibration resulting from construction activities will be intermittent.

The degree of construction noise impacts may vary depending on the construction activity and location within the project area. The general construction activities and their estimated overall noise levels are summarized in Table 2.2.13-2. In the table, the average sound level over a period of time (usually one hour) is called the equivalent continuous sound level and is abbreviated “Leq.” In addition, dBA equals A-weighted decibel. Table 2.2.13-3 provides noise levels produced by specific construction equipment representative of the equipment necessary for the project construction.

Table 2.2.13-2 Typical Construction Activity/Phase Noise Levels Construction Phase/Activity Leq at 50 feet away from
Project Centerline (dBA)
Pile Driving 100
Ground Clearing 84
Excavation 88/78
Foundation 88
Erection 79/78
Finishing 84
Source: Dewberry, 2023.

Table 2.2.13-3. Construction Equipment-Specific Noise Levels Construction Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA at 50 feet) [dBA = A-weighted decibel]
Scrapers 85 dBA
Jack Hammer 85 dBA
Bulldozer 85 dBA
Pile Driver (Impact) 100 dBA
Front-End Loader 80 dBA
Grader 85 dBA
Heavy Trucks 85 dBA
Excavator 85 dBA
Compaction Equipment 80 dBA
Backhoe 80 dBA
Drill Rig 85 dBA
Crane 85 dBA
Concrete Pump 82 dBA
Paver 85 dBA
Pneumatic Tools 85 dBA
Generators 82 dBA
Source: Dewberry, 2023.
516
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  66 Noise from construction activities generally attenuates at a rate of 6 to 7.5 A- weighted decibels per doubling distance. For the purposes of the project, an attenuation of 6 A-weighted decibels was used to conservatively estimate noise impacts. The closest sensitive receptors are 60 feet from the project site (see Figure 2.2.13-1).

Noise from construction activities will be intermittent because noise intensity will vary depending on the construction phase, the equipment being used, and the distance of the activity to sensitive receptors. Increases in ambient noise level in the vicinity of the project will be temporary and will cease upon construction completion.

The loudest construction activity for the project will be pile driving (see Table

2.2.13-3). The project will install 240 piles over 60 working days (approximately 3 months). The piles will reach a maximum depth of 100 feet, requiring approximately 10,000 strikes per pile. The noise experienced from pile driving by sensitive receptors within 50 feet of the project area will be comparable to a grass lawn mower from 3 feet away (see Table 2.2.13-1).

The sensitive receptors at 60 and 65 feet from the project area will experience noise levels ranging from 100 A-weighted decibels to 94 A-weighted decibels.

Sensitive receptors 100 feet from the construction area will experience maximum noise levels during pile driving of approximately 94 A-weighted decibels (100 A-weighted decibels [at 50 feet] minus 6 A-weighted decibels [doubling distance of 100 feet] equals 94 A-weighted decibels). Sensitive receptors 200 feet from the project area will experience maximum noise levels during pile driving of approximately 88 A-weighted decibels (94 A- weighted decibels [at 100 feet] minus 6 A-weighted decibels [doubling distance of 200 feet] equals 88 A-weighted decibels). The impulsive nature of pile driving tends to increase its perceived nuisance. Noise control measures for pile driving will require this construction activity to occur only during daytime hours. Pile driving will occur intermittently for a portion (3 months) of the entire construction period of 18 to 24 months.

The project will comply with the Caltrans 2022 Standards Specifications Section 14-8, Noise and Vibration. Regarding hours of construction, Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 14-8.02, Noise Control, states that construction activities should not exceed a maximum noise level of 86 A- weighted decibels at a distance of 50 feet from the project site from 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. In addition, given that pile driving will result in up to 100 A- weighted decibels, no pile driving will be allowed during nighttime construction work and will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday.

A Construction Noise Management Plan will be completed for the project and will include the proper posting of construction schedules and the appointment of a noise disturbance coordinator. In addition, construction activities for the project will comply with federal, state, and local policies related to 517
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  67 construction-generated noise. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact regarding noise.

Pedestrian and bicycle uses generally do not increase noise levels above the level for normal speech (approximately 65 A-weighted decibels) and do not generate vibrations. Therefore, the project will not permanently increase ambient noise levels; project operations will have similar noise levels to the existing Enterprise Canal Trail and sidewalk facility noise conditions. Nearby sensitive receptors will not perceive a permanent change in noise levels as a result of the project. Impacts during project operation will be less than significant.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
NOI-1: A Construction Noise Management Plan shall be prepared and shall include proper posting of construction schedules, appointment of a noise disturbance coordinator, and the methods for assisting in noise reduction measures. Noise reduction measures include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Use newer equipment with improved muffling and ensure that all equipment items have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine closures, and engine vibration isolators intact and operational. Newer equipment will generally be quieter in operation than older equipment. All construction equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best available noise control techniques, which include, but are not limited to, improved mufflers, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine closures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds.
• Impact tools (such as jackhammers, pavement breakers, pile drivers, and rock drills) used for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools. If the use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used. • No pile driving shall occur between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, or between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday.
• Use construction methods or equipment that will provide the lowest level of noise and ground vibration impact such as alternative low noise pile installation methods.
• Turn off idling equipment after no more than 5 minutes. • Stationary noise sources during construction shall be located as far from adjacent properties as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporate insulation barriers, or other similar noise reduction construction methods approved by the City of Clovis that provides equivalent noise reduction.
518
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  68

2.2.14 Population and Housing
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, and the U.S. Census Bureau for Demographics and Housing Estimates accessed January 2023, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project CEQA Determination
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)?
No Impact
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact

2.2.15 Public Services
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, the Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, City of Clovis Police General Information accessed December 2022, City of Clovis Fire Department Annual Report accessed December 2022, and the City of Clovis General Plan, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question CEQA Determination
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 maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the following public services:
a) Fire protection?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Police protection? Less Than Significant
Impact
c) Schools? No Impact
d) Parks? No Impact
e) Other public facilities? Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
Police Protection
The Clovis Police Department provides service within the existing City of Clovis boundaries, while the Fresno County Sheriff’s Department provides law enforcement protection to the unincorporated areas of Fresno County. The 519
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  69 project site is within the City of Clovis boundaries and is served by the Clovis Police Department. Currently, the Clovis Police Department has 200 employees, with 105 sworn officers. The Clovis Police Department headquarters, where all personnel and services are based, is at the Clovis Civic Center, 1233 Fifth Street, approximately 3 miles southwest of the project site.

The California Highway Patrol Central Division also provides safety, service, and security to thousands of residents, commuters, and tourists each day on State Route 168. As part of the California Highway Patrol’s Central Division, the California Highway Patrol covers more than 6,000 square miles, with officers patrolling over 4,045 miles of freeways and unincorporated areas within Fresno County, including through and around the City of Clovis.

Fire Protection
The Clovis Fire Department provides fire protection to the City of Clovis and supplements protection through an automatic aid agreement with the Fresno Fire Department west and south of the City of Clovis’ sphere of influence and the Fresno County Fire Protection District to the north and east of the City of Clovis’ sphere of influence. Currently, the Clovis Fire Department operates 6 stations with 73 professional firefighters, fire engineers, fire officers, chief officers, fire inspectors, and administrative staff. The closest fire station to the project site is Station 5, at 790 North Temperance Avenue, approximately half a mile west of the project site. Table 2.2.15-1 shows the Clovis Fire Department’s response time goals and actual performance in 2021. The Clovis Fire Department anticipates that with the opening of Station 6, which opened in April 2022, and the additional staff added in 2021 and 2022, performance times will continue to improve and meet performance goals.

Table 2.2.15-1 90
th Percentile Response Goals and 2021 Response Time
Performance
Response Unit Response Goal Actual Performance
(2021)
Response Goal 1
First unit arrival, total response time – EMS
6 minutes, 30
seconds
8 minutes
Response Goal 2
First until arrival, total response time –
MVA/Rescue
7 minutes 8 minutes
Response Goal 3
First unit arrival, total response time – Fire
7 minutes 7 minutes, 43
seconds
Response Goal 4
Effective response force (daily staffing of 16
firefighters) – Fire
10 minutes, 30
seconds
11 minutes, 53
seconds
Response Goal 5
Turnout time for all priority responses
1 minute, 30 seconds 1 minute, 34 seconds
Response Goal 6
Contain fire to room of origin
70 percent of all fire
calls for service
61 percent of all fire
calls for service
Source: City of Clovis, 2021b.
520
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  70 Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, and e in the table) During construction of the project, a series of freeway and local roadway closures will be required. Temporary closures on State Route 168 will occur between the State Route 168/Owens Mountain Parkway intersection and the State Route 168/North Temperance Avenue interchange, as well as Tollhouse Road and one lane in the eastbound direction of Owens Mountain Parkway. One direction of traffic will be maintained on State Route 168 throughout construction. The North Temperance Avenue on-ramp will be closed for up to nine months for bent construction. The westbound State Route 168 off-ramp to North Temperance Avenue will be closed for up to three months for bent construction. A series of three nighttime closures for one week (Monday through Friday) or one weekend in each direction on State Route 168 will be required for placement of girders over the freeway.

Temporary closure(s) of the State Route 168 within the project site will require a detour onto North Temperance Avenue to East Shepherd Avenue to State Route 168 (refer to Figure 1-5).

Emergency access to, and through, the vicinity of the project site may be temporarily inhibited during construction of the project as a result of these closures. A Standard Construction Period Emergency Access Plan will be prepared for the project to ensure that traffic disruptions are minimized. The Standard Construction Period Emergency Access Plan, as well as the project construction phases, will be coordinated with the Clovis Police Department, Clovis Fire Department, Fresno County Sheriff’s Department, Fresno County Fire Protection District, California Highway Patrol, and other emergency service providers within the area. With the implementation of the Standard Construction Period Emergency Access Plan and the coordination with emergency service providers, the project will have a less than significant impact on response times for fire and police protection services.

Construction workers are anticipated to come from the surrounding area and will not relocate to the project vicinity. Construction workers will be on the project site during construction hours and will return home in the off hours.

Construction of the project could result in accident or emergency incidents that will require emergency response, such as fire, police, medical, or hazardous waste services; however, construction activities will be short in duration. Any increase in fire or law enforcement services due to construction activities will be temporary, ceasing upon completion of the project. In addition, standard construction safety measures, as required through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, will be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.

The project will provide additional connection points to existing recreational facilities. The project will not increase the use of park or other public facilities beyond what the City of Clovis has already planned for in the General Plan. 521
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  71

2.2.16 Recreation
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, City of Clovis General Plan, City of Clovis Active Transportation Plan, Fresno County Regional Trails Plan, Fresno County Regional Bicycle and Recreational Trails Master Plan, and the Fresno County Active Transportation Plan, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
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?
No Impact
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
No Impact

2.2.17 Transportation
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, City of Clovis General Plan, City of Clovis Active Transportation Plan, Fresno County Regional Trails Plan, Fresno County Regional Bicycle and Recreational Trails Master Plan, Fresno County Active Transportation Plan, and the Fresno Council of Goverments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
No Impact
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant
Impact
c) 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
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact
Affected Environment
Roadways
Roadways within and adjacent to the project site include Owens Mountain Parkway, State Route 168, North Temperance Avenue, Tollhouse Road, and 522
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  72 Medical Center Drive. Owens Mountain Parkway and Tollhouse Road are both collector streets that provide for relatively short distance travel between and within neighborhoods. Collectors are not designed to handle long- distance through-traffic. Owens Mountain Parkway is a striped four-lane roadway with paved shoulders and sidewalks on both sides. Tollhouse Road is a striped two-lane road with unpaved shoulders and no sidewalks. North Temperance Avenue is an expressway up to the intersection with Owens Mountain Parkway, where it turns into an arterial street until reaching Shepherd Avenue. North Temperance Avenue in the vicinity of the project site is a four-lane roadway with a raised median, paved shoulders, and sidewalks on both sides. State Route 168 is a four-lane freeway with paved shoulders.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
An existing Class 2 bicycle lane runs along Herndon Avenue to the south of the project site and along North Temperance Avenue to the west of the project site. The City of Clovis General Plan identifies a future Class 2 bicycle lane that will include Owens Mountain Parkway and will connect directly to the project. The project is also identified as a future facility by the City of Clovis and County General Plans.

Environmental Consequences (Questions b, c, and d in the table) Transportation projects that can be presumed to lower vehicle miles traveled or have no effect on vehicle miles traveled, such as bicycle and pedestrian projects, transit improvements, and minor operational improvements, as defined in the State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory, should be expected to cause a less than significant impact and will not require further vehicle miles traveled analysis. Specifically, projects that will not lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle miles traveled, include:
• Addition of Class 1 bicycle paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-motorized travel
• Addition of a new or enhanced bicycle or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways that serve non-motorized travel
The project will construct a Class 1 overcrossing connecting existing facilities north and south of State Route 168. In addition, the project will encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation for residents, visitors, and employees of the major employment centers within the City of Clovis.

During construction, the project will require a series of freeway and local roadway closures, as described in detail in Section 1.4.2, Lane and Roadway Closures. The State Route 168 closures will require a detour onto North Temperance Avenue to East Shepherd Avenue to State Route 168 (see Figure 1-5). The distance between the North Temperance Avenue/State Route 168 interchange and East Shepherd Avenue/State Route 168 523
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  73 intersection, when traveling on State Route 168, is approximately 2.7 miles; the detour route is approximately 3.9 miles. Therefore, the detour route will result in a 1.2-mile increase in vehicle miles traveled. However, lane closures will be temporary, will occur only when portions of State Route 168 required closures, and will be eliminated upon completion of construction. Therefore, the lane closures are considered to have a minimal effect on overall vehicle miles traveled.

There could be conflict with construction equipment and adjacent land uses.

Potential conflicts in movement of construction equipment and other roadway vehicles will cease upon construction completion. A Standard Construction Period Emergency Access Plan and a Traffic Handling Plan will be prepared so that lane shifts, construction activities, and construction equipment do not conflict with other vehicles moving through the project site. Therefore, the project’s impacts to transportation will be less than significant.

2.2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Considering the information in the Historic Property Survey Report and associated Archaeological Survey Report dated July 2017, and Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report, Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report and the Finding of No Adverse Effect, all dated June 2023, the following significance deteminations have been made:

Question CEQA Determination
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
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), or
Less Than Significant
Impact
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 Code Section 5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less Than Significant
Impact
524
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  74 Affected Environment
A tribal cultural resource is defined as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, or sacred place or object that has cultural value to California Native American Tribes. To be considered a tribal cultural resource, the resource must be included in or determined eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or is included in a local register of historical resources. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 2107, a tribal cultural resource is defined as either:

1. A site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object that has cultural value to California Native American Tribes that is included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register of historical resources.

2. A resource determined by the lead agency to be significant and is supported by substantial evidence.

3. A geographically defined cultural landscape that meets the criteria set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21074.

4. A historical resource described in Public Resources Code Section 21084.1, a unique archeological resource or “nonunique archaeological resource” described in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 (g) and (h).

The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines state that California Native American Tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area may have expertise concerning their tribal cultural resources. Lead agencies shall consult with these tribes who respond in writing and request consultation within 30 days of receipt of the formal notification of a project (Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1). Traditionally and culturally affiliated tribes of a project area may suggest mitigation measures, including, but not limited to, those recommended in Public Resources Code Section 21084.3.

Native American Consultation
Assembly Bill 52 went into effect on July 1, 2015 and established a consultation process with all California Native American Tribes on the Native American Heritage Commission List for federal and non-federal tribes (13.5 Public Resources Code Sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3, 21084). Once the Tribe is notified of a project, the Tribe has 30 days to request a consultation.

The consultation process ends when either the parties agree to mitigation measures or avoid a significant effect on tribal cultural resources or a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effect, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached.

In October 2016, the Native American Heritage Commission provided a list of nine Native American representatives. On November 18, 2016, the City of Clovis sent letters to the listed representatives. Additional attempts to contact representatives were made on December 1 and 13, 2016. On January 7, 525
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  75 2017, Caltrans recommended an additional 17 Native American representatives be contacted, and letters were sent on January 10, 2017.

Additional attempts to contact representatives were made on April 5 and 11, 2017. Four responses were received during this consultation.

On November 29, 2016, one Tribe (Table Mountain Rancheria) indicated that the project area lies within the Tribe’s cultural area of interest and that the Tribe is very interested in the project. Mr. Robert Pennell, Table Mountain Rancheria Cultural Resources Director, requested to be contacted to coordinate a discussion of the project. On January 10, 2017, the Table Mountain Rancheria discussed the project with Rene Mathis of the City of Clovis. During this meeting, the Tribe requested the presence of tribal monitoring during ground-disturbing activities, and the City of Clovis agreed; the two governments are in communication regarding the project. The Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation (December 1, 2016) and Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe (December 13, 2016) deferred to the Table Mountain Rancheria to take the lead for consultation.

Due to refinements to the project and the date of the previous consultation, the Native American Heritage Commission was contacted with a request for an updated tribal contact list on September 30, 2022. On November 13, 2022, the Native American Heritage Commission provided a list of 17 Native American representatives. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3 and Assembly Bill 52, the City of Clovis mailed formal notification letters on January 9, 2023, by certified mail; the letters summarized the previous outreach efforts, noted changes to the project description and location, and provided lead City of Clovis contact information to the Tribes listed in the Native American Heritage Commission correspondence. Follow- up emails were sent on May 2, 2023. No responses have been received from the letters or emails, as of the publication of this Initial Study.

Record Searches
As discussed in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, a record search of the area of potential effects and a quarter-mile radius around the area of potential effects was conducted by staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System and completed on October 26, 2016. In October 2022, a second literature search was conducted by the staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System.

The results of the record searches identified six historic era cultural resources within the record search radius.

As part of the effort to identify any tribal cultural resources that may be within the project area, a Sacred Lands File search was conducted by the Native American Heritage Commission in October 2016; a second search was conducted in November 2022. The search found no known tribal cultural 526
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  76 resourcess in or near the project site. Information regarding cultural resources can be found in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study.

Pedestrian Surveys
A pedestrian survey of the project was conducted on November 13, 2016 for all undeveloped ground surface areas within the original area of potential effects boundaries. A second pedestrian survey was conducted on November 20, 2022 within the revised area of potential effects boundaries. A third pedestrian survey, focused on the built environment, was conducted on May 3, 2023.

No archaeological resources, historic or prehistoric, were observed during the surveys. One historical resource—the Enterprise Canal—is within the area of potential effects and is assumed eligible for the purposes of this project with the Cultural Study Office concurrence. Cultural resources identified during the field survey are discussed in detail in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a and b in the table) As discussed above and in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, record searches conducted by staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center identified six previously recorded resources within the record search radius. No prehistoric archaeological resources were recorded during the pedestrian surveys.

The Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File search was negative for sacred lands. The field surveys did not identify any tribal cultural resources, artifacts, or culturally modified soil indicators. No tribal cultural resources were identified as a result of the field survey, record searches or consultation. However, the Table Mountain Rancheria and Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe indicated that the project is in an extremely sensitive area for tribal cultural resources. The Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe deferred to the Table Mountain Rancheria to take the lead on consultation. The Table Mountain Rancheria requested that ground-disturbing construction be monitored by a tribal monitor. Therefore, the City of Clovis will retain the services of an approved Native American Tribal monitor. The project will follow best management practices and Tribal monitor recommendations during construction.

Avoidance and minimization measures CUL-1, TCR-1, and TCR-2 are provided in the event of an unaticipated discovery of tribal cultural resources during construction. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.

For a detailed description of archaeological and historical resources, refer to Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, of this document.
527
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  77 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Implement Avoidance and Minimization Measure CUL-1, as described in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources.

TCR-1: The City of Clovis will retain the services of an approved Native American Tribal Representative, in coordination with the Table Mountain Rancheria, to conduct project monitoring during the disturbance of original earth by accomplishing the following tasks:
• The City of Clovis-contracted Native American Tribal Representative will advise the contractor during a preconstruction meeting and training of potentially significant cultural resources that require protection and avoidance;
• A Native American monitor will observe all natural-ground-disturbing construction activities; and
• There will be a Native American Tribal Representative during all project excavation of natural ground.

TCR-2: If any suspected Tribal cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 100 feet of the find, or an agreed upon distance based on the project area and nature of the find. A Tribal Representative from Table Mountain Rancheria shall be immediately notified and shall determine if the find is a Tribal cultural resource (Public Resources Code Section 21074). The Tribal Representative will make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment:
• When avoidance is infeasible, preservation in place is the preferred option for mitigation of Tribal cultural resources, and every effort shall be made to preserve the resources in place, including through project redesign.

Culturally appropriate treatment may be, but is not limited to, processing materials for reburial, minimizing handling of cultural objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning objects to a location within the project area where they will not be subject to future impacts.

Permanent curation of Tribal cultural resources will not take place unless approved in writing by the California Native American Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. • The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the City of Clovis to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the resource, including, but not limited to, facilitating the appropriate Tribal treatment of the find, as necessary. Treatment that preserves or restores the cultural character and integrity of a Tribal cultural resource may include Tribal Monitoring, culturally appropriate recovery of cultural objects, and reburial of cultural objects or cultural soil. 528
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  78

2.2.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, City of Clovis General Plan, City of Clovis Public Utilities Recycling and Refuse, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question – Would the project: CEQA Determination
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less Than Significant
Impact
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
No Impact
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact
Affected Environment
The City of Clovis uses a combination of groundwater, surface water, and recycled water resources to serve commercial and residential areas, and public facilities. The City of Clovis’ primary water supply is drawn from over 35 groundwater wells. The Fresno Irrigation District provides surface water to the City of Clovis, primarily from the Kings River. The City of Clovis Public Utilities Department uses this resource to recharge groundwater, develop potable water, and directly irrigate City of Clovis parks. The City of Clovis Public Utilities Department is the sole municipal water purveyor in the City of Clovis.

The City of Clovis Public Utilities Department provides wastewater service within the City of Clovis boundary. The majority of wastewater within the City of Clovis is discharged to the Fresno-Clovis Regional Water Reclamation Facility in southwest Fresno or to the Clovis Water Reuse Facility.

Wastewater recycling and surface water treatment facilities in the area include the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and Clovis’ 529
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  79 Surface Water Treatment Plant; they provide water for non-potable water uses and recharging the groundwater basin, respectively.

Pacific Gas and Electric is the primary provider of electric service and natural gas in the City of Clovis’ planning area. Land-line telephone services are provided by multiple carriers, including AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon. Television and internet services are provided by Comcast, AT&T, and satellite services.

Solid waste is collected by the City of Clovis Public Utilities Department.

Collection of recycling and greenwaste is provided under contract by Republic Services. Four facilities in the Fresno area—three transfer stations and one inert debris engineered fill operation—accept construction and demolition debris. The Rice Road Recyclery and Transfer Station, which accepts construction and demolition debris, is at 10463 North Rice Road, Fresno, California 93650, approximately 9 miles northwest of the project site. The nearest landfill that accepts construction and demolition debris is Jefferson Inert Debris Engineered Fill Operation at 5550 South Maple Avenue, Fresno, California 93725, approximately 13 miles southwest of the project site.

Existing utilities are in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Surface and underground utilities include communication, gas, irrigation, water, sewer, and electrical lines.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a and d in the table) Construction Impacts
Non-potable water use will be required for fugitive dust control during the construction of the project. See Section 1.6 and Section 2.2.3 for more information regarding fugitive dust control and best management practices.

Water supplies, potable and non-potable, during construction are typically trucked to the site from the outside sources that supply water for construction activities. The need for additional water will cease upon construction completion.

Potable water will be required during construction for workers. Typically, potable water is brought to the site in bottles or other vessels. Water use at the project site will cease upon completion of construction. No new or expanded water facilities will be required as a result of project construction.

During construction, port-a-potties are typically used; however, they are removed once construction is completed. These facilities are operated by private companies that provide cleaning services; therefore, the project construction will not increase wastewater service demand during construction.

No new or expanded facilities will be required.

Construction equipment will be powered by fuel, often diesel, or by generators brought to the project site for construction purposes. Therefore, the construction of the project will not result in the need for new or expanded utility services.

Existing utilities that conflict with the project will be relocated. Underground relocation for the overhead utility along Tollhouse Road may be considered. In 530
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  80 addition, relocation may also be considered for two other surface utilities and one underground utility all along Tollhouse Road. As the project moves into final design, coordination with the appropriate utility companies will occur. It is not anticipated that these adjustments or relocations will result in any utility disruptions to customers, and relocations will occur within the project boundaries. Impacts are less than significant in this regard.

There will be no demolition of structures associated with the project. In conforming to existing facilities, existing concrete and asphalt will be removed; this debris will be properly disposed of at the nearest facility. The nearest facilities accepting construction debris are the Rice Road Recyclery and Transfer Station and the Jefferson Inert Debris Engineered Fill Operation, which have capacity to accommodate the project. Construction debris generated by the project will adhere to federal, state, and City of Clovis requirements pertaining to recycling and diversion of construction debris.

Operation Impacts
New light features added to the bridge will meet current energy standards and will not substantially increase the need for additional electrical power (refer to Section 2.2.6, Energy). Therefore, the project will not require the expansion or construction of new electrical facilities.

The project operations will not generate substantial amounts of solid waste beyond trash that trail users may inadvertently drop on the route. Operation impacts will be less than significant.

2.2.20 Wildfire
Considering the information in the Mini-Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report dated 2018, Environmental Scoping Memorandum dated October 2019, and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps for Fresno County accessed December 2021, the following significance determinations have been made:

Question CEQA Determination
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact
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?
No Impact
531
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  81 Question CEQA Determination
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact
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?
No Impact

2.2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Question CEQA Determination
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?
Less Than Significant
Impact
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.)
Less Than Significant
Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant
Impact
Affected Environment
Per California Environmental Quality Act regulations and guidelines, Caltrans must summarize the findings of significance from earlier sections and consider potential cumulatively considerable effects for environmental impact reports. Even though this environmental document is an Initial Study and not an Environmental Impact Report, the potential for cumulatively considerable effects is analyzed below.

Environmental Consequences (Questions a, b, and c in the table) Each resource within this Initial Study evaluates the project impacts and mitigates the impacts to less than significant. The information in Section 2.2.4, Biological Resources, analyzes the potential effects of the project on biological resources, including special-status wildlife species, including the western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, California horned lark, and nesting migratory 532
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Chapter 2  CEQA Evaluation
State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  82 birds. Section 2.2.4, Biological Resources, determined that impacts will be less than significant. The information in Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 2.2.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, analyzes possible project effects on cultural and tribal cultural resources, including the possibility of human remains.

Section 2.2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 2.2.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, determined that impacts will be less than significant.

The project approval is conditioned upon implementation of best management practices (Section 1.6) and avoidance and minimization measures (Sections

2.2.1 through 2.2.20). The project-related impacts are less than significant. In addition, the project will have no impact or less than significnat impacts on human beings, as related to the resources analyzed in Sections 2.2.1 through

2.2.21. Therefore, with implementation of best management practices (Section 1.6) and avoidance and minimization measures (Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.20), cumulative impacts are less than significant.

533
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  83 Appendix A Title VI Policy Statement

534
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

535
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  85 Appendix B Comments and Responses
This appendix has been added since the draft environmental document was circulated.

This appendix contains the comments received during the public circulation and comment period from June 24, 2024, to July 24, 2024, retyped for readability. The comment letters are stated verbatim as submitted, with acronyms, abbreviations, and any original grammatical or typographical errors included. A Caltrans response follows each comment presented. Copies of the original comment letters and documents can be found in this document.

A public notice in English and Spanish was posted in The Business Journal (a Fresno-based weekly newspaper that focuses on local business news in Fresno, Madera, Tulare and Kings counties) and The Clovis Roundup (a local community newspaper serving the Central Valley) on June 24, 2024. It stated the public review and comment period for the draft environmental document would run from June 24, 2024, to July 24, 2024, and gave instructions on where to access the document and related project material.

Two letters were submitted during the public circulation and comment period.

Both comment letters are detailed below.

Comment from the California Highway Patrol
State of California Transportation Agency
Gavin Newsom, Governor
Department of California Highway Patrol
1380 East Fortune Avenue, Fresno, CA 93725
(559) 705-2200 (Phone)
(800) 735-2929 (TT/TDD)
(800) 735-2922 (Voice)
July 17, 2024
File No.: 435.15726.19145.24-216
California Department of Transportation, District 6
2015 E. Shields Avenue, Suite 100
Fresno, CA 93726
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW AND RESPONSE SCH#
2024061001
The California Highway Patrol (CHP) Fresno Area was requested to review and assess the State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project, for any potential impact to local Area operations and public safety. 536
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  86 After review, there are concerns with the potential impact this project could have on traffic congestion, response time for calls for service, and the safe and legal operation of heavy trucks in the general area of State Route 168 and Temperance Avenue.

After review of the provided documents, the concerns relate to the proposed construction of building a bicycle/pedestrian overcrossing, located on State Route 168, east of North Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway in Clovis, California. The CHP's interest in commenting surrounds the concern for the safe and legal operation of heavy trucks. Heavy trucks on local roadways and freeways will increase as materials and products are transported to, and from the area. We are hopeful engineers and supervisors on scene of the project will monitor and enforce site rules related to vehicle safety as CHP personnel work to assure compliance with California Vehicle Code provisions.

Response times for calls for service may increase due to the closure of State Route 168 and Toll House Road. CHP and other emergency personnel would be required to use alternate routes of Temperance Avenue and Herndon Avenue for any calls for service east of the closure. Combined with the increased traffic congestion associated with a freeway closure, utilizing the alternate routes could extend response time. This project could have an impact on local Area operations due to the increased traffic congestion from the closure of traffic lanes, which could necessitate the need for additional traffic control measures to mitigate the potential increase in crashes within our jurisdiction.

Also, other concerns are Temperance Avenue, Tollhouse Road and Shepherd Avenue are not a designated truck route. The roundabout located at Temperance Avenue and Owens Mountain Parkway has two designated lanes, but trucks may need to use both to continue North on the proposed detour. The Area request Caltrans to determine if the bridge over Enterprise Canal on Tollhouse Road is suitable for heavy trucks.

If you have any questions, or if you need additional information, please contact the California Highway Patrol, Seargeant Miguel Andrade, ID 19145, at (559) 705-2200.

Sincerely,
A. MATULONIS, Captain Commander
Enclosure
cc: Central Division
Caltrans Response to Comment 1: Thank you for your letter in response to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration for the State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project.
537
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  87 Caltrans acknowledges the California Highway Patrol’s concern about safe and legal operation of heavy trucks during project construction activities.

Project contractors must have California-licensed drivers and vehicles that must comply with California Vehicle Code. Caltrans, the City of Clovis, and the contractor will work together to enforce site rules, Caltrans Standard Specifications, and best management practices related to vehicle safety. No revisions to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration are necessary based on the comments received from California Highway Patrol.

The letter has been conveyed to our design and traffic handling teams.

Caltrans Response to Comment 2: Caltrans acknowledges the California Highway Patrol’s concern about a potential increase in emergency response times due to closures of State Route 168 and Tollhouse Road, the length of detour routes, and the potential that detour roads and bridges are not designated truck routes or suitable for heavy trucks. Sections 2.2.15, Public Services, and 2.2.17, Transportation, of this Initial Study discuss and analyze detours and roadway closures that could temporarily affect passenger vehicles, heavy trucks, and emergency access in the project area. The expected construction detour for this project is approximately 1.2 miles. One direction of traffic would be maintained on State Route 168 throughout construction. The westbound State Route 168 off-ramp to North Temperance Avenue would be closed for up to three months for bent construction.

A series of three nighttime closures for one week (Monday through Friday) or one weekend in each direction on State Route 168 will be required for placement of girders over the freeway. Detours and lane/ramp closures will be finalized and coordinated with law enforcement (Clovis Police Department, Fresno County Sheriff’s Department, California Highway Patrol), fire protection services (Clovis Fire Department, Fresno County Fire Protection District), and other medical and emergency service providers prior to the start of project construction. This will allow for adjustments in the detour route(s), if necessary, for heavy trucks or other vehicles, including emergency services.

In addition, these closures will occur during nighttime or weekend hours, when traffic volumes are lower than weekday traffic volumes.

As mentioned in Sections 2.2.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, 2.2.15, Public Services, and 2.2.17, Transportation, a Standard Construction Period Emergency Access Plan and a Traffic Handling Plan will be prepared so that lane shifts, lane/ramp closures, construction activities, and construction equipment do not conflict with other vehicles, including emergency vehicles, moving through the project site. Both of these plans will be prepared in coordination with the Clovis Police Department, Fresno County Sheriff’’s Department, California Highway Patrol, Clovis Fire Department, and Fresno County Fire Protection District. During the preparation and coordination of these plans, revisions (i.e., ensure that roads are desingated truck routes) to the construction detour routes based on the feedback received will occur. In addition, the project will comply with Caltrans Standard Specifications, 538
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  88 including Section 12, Temporary Traffic Control. No revisions to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration are necessary based on the comments received from the California Highway Patrol.

Comment from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife State of California Natural Resources Agency
Gavin Newsom, Governor
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Charlton H. Bonham, Director
Central Region
1234 East Shaw Avenue
Fresno, California 93710
www.wildlife.ca.gov
July 18, 2024
Trais Norris
California Department of Transportation
2015 West Shields Avenue, Suite 100
Fresno, California 93726
Subject: State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (EA 06-0U840) (Project) Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration State Clearinghourse No. 2024061001
Dear Trais Norris:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received an Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the above referenced Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, CDFW appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the state (Fish & G. Code, §711.7, sued. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, §21070; CEQA Guidelines §15386, subd. (a)). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., §1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency 539
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  89 environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, §21069; CEQA Guidelines, §15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority (Fish & G. Code, §1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in take as defined by state law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, §2050 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code may be required.

In this role, CDFW is responsible for providing, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts (e.g., CEQA), focusing specifically on project activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. CDFW provides recommendations to identify potential impacts and possible measures to avoid or reduce those impacts.

Bird Protection: CDFW has jurisdiction over actions with potential to result in the disturbance or destruction of active nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Fish and Game Code sections that protect birds, their eggs and nests include, sections 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird), 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird).

Unlisted Species: Species of plants and animals need not be officially listed as Endangered, Rare, or Threatened (E, R, or T) on any state or federal list to be considered E, R, or T under CEQA. If a species can be shown to meet the criteria for E, R, or T, as specified in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15380, CDFW recommends it be fully considered in the environmental analysis for the Project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Proponent: Caltrans
Objective: The Project will construct a pedestrian bridge overcrossing spanning State Route (SR) 168, extending the Enterprise Canal Trail south of State 168 and provide direct pedestrian access to the Clovis Community Hospital Complex. The proposed bridge would be approximately 18-foot wide and 460-foot long, provide a minimum vertical clearance of 18.5 feet with a combined approach length of approximately 1,100 feet north and south of the bridge. The approaches would consist of embankment fill, retaining walls, and approach structures.
540
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  90 Location: The proposed project is located on SR 168, east of North Temperance Avenue and south of Owens Mountain Parkway, at post mile R9.5, within the City of Clovis.

Timeframe: Project construction is estimated to occur from Spring 2026 to Spring 2028.

I. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the following comments and recommendations to assist Caltrans in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. Editorial comments or other suggestions may also be included to improve the document.

Based on the Project location and proposed Project activities in the Initial Study, CDFW is concerned regarding potential impacts to special-status species, including but not limited to, the state-threatened Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni).

Swainson’s Hawk (SWHA):

SWHA are known to breed within the Central Valley of California and prefer to nest and forage in alfalfa, fallow fields, field crops, and grassland habitats with a sufficient source of small mammals (CDFG 1994). Based on aerial imagery, there are trees and structures located within the vicinity of the Project area that may provide suitable nesting habitat. Therefore, CDFW recommends a qualified biologist conduct surveys for nesting SWHA following the entire survey methodology developed by the SWHA Technical Advisory Committee (2000) as part of the biological technical studies conducted in support of the Initial Study. Depending on the time between the survey efforts conducted in support of the Initial Study and project construction, CDFW recommends additional surveys, following the survey methodology developed by the SWHA Technical Advisory Committee, be repeated the survey season immediately prior to construction. If Project-specific activities will take place during the SWHA nesting season (i.e., March 1 through September 15), and active SWHA nests are present, CDFW recommends a minimum ½-mile no- disturbance buffer be delineated and maintained around each nest, regardless of whether it was detected by surveys or observed incidentally.

These buffers would remain in place until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, to prevent nest abandonment and other take of SWHA as a result of Project activities. In the event an active SWHA nest is detected, and a ½-mile no-disturbance buffer is not feasible, consultation with CDFW is warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization through the acquisition of an Incidental Take Permit, pursuant to 541
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  91 Fish and Game Code section 2081 subdivision (b) is necessary to comply with CESA.

II. EDITORIAL COMMENTS AND/OR SUGGESTIONS
Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement: Project activities that will substantially change the bed, bank, and channel of streams and associated wetlands are subject to CDFW’s regulatory authority pursuant Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq. Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires an entity to notify CDFW prior to commencing any activity that may (a) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (b) substantially change or use any material from the bed, bank, or channel of any river, stream, or lake; (c) deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake. “Any river, stream, or lake” includes those that are ephemeral or intermittent as well as those that are perennial. It is important to note that if Project activities require notification, CDFW is required to comply with CEQA in the issuance of a Lake or Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement; therefore, if the CEQA document approved for the Project does not adequately describe the Project and its impacts, a subsequent CEQA analysis may be necessary for LSA Agreement issuance.

Additional information on notification requirements is available through the Central Region LSA Program at (559) 243-4593 or [email protected] and the CDFW website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)). Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to CNDDB. The CNDDB field survey form can be found at the following link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting- Data. The completed form can be mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address: [email protected]. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals.

FILING FEES
If it is determined that the Project has the potential to impact biological resources, an assessment of filing fees will be necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, §753.5; Fish and Game Code, §711.4; Pub.

Resources Code, §21089).

CONCLUSION
542
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  92 CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Project to assist Caltrans in identifying and mitigating the Project’s impacts on biological resources.

More information on survey and monitoring protocols for sensitive species can be found at CDFW’s website (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey- Protocols). If you have any questions, please contact Grant Piepkorn, Environmental Scientist, at the address provided on this letterhead, by telephone at (559) 807-1459, or by electronic mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Sarah Paulson
For: Julie A. Vance Regional Manager
References:

California Department of Fish and Game. 1994. Staff report regarding mitigation for impacts to Swainson’s hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California.

Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Recommended timing and methodology for Swainson’s hawk nesting surveys in California’s Central Valley. Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee.

Caltrans Response to Comment 1: Thank you for your letter in response to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration for the State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project. The letter has been conveyed to our design team.

Caltrans acknowledges your concerns about potential impacts to the Swainson’s hawk during project construction activities. Section 2.3.4, Biological Resources, of this document analyzes potential project impacts to the Swainson’s hawk and provides Avoidance and Minimization Measure BIO-2, which outlines the requirements regarding pre-construction surveys and steps to take if nesting birds are identified. Steps taken will be conducted in accordance with the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee to protect this species, if the hawk is found on the project site. In addition, BIO-2 requires worker environmental awareness training to instruct construction workers on how to recognize Swainson’s hawks and their habitats. Revisions to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration are not required based on this comment.

Caltrans Response to Comment 2: Caltrans acknowledges the requirements for a Section 1600 et seq. permit if a lake or streambed is altered due to project implementation. The project will not include alterations to a lake or streambed. Therefore, the project will not require a permit under 543
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  93 Section 1600 et. seq. Revisions to the Initial Study with Proposed Negative Declaration are not required based on this comment.
544
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  94 List of Technical Studies Bound Separately
Biggs Cardosa Associates. 2020. Visual Impact Assessment.

Cogstone Resource Management. 2017. Archaeological Survey Report for the Enterprise Canal/State Route 168 Pedestrian Bridge Project, Clovis, Fresno County, California.

Cogstone Resource Management. 2017. Historic Property Survey Report for the Enterprise Canal/State Route 168 Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Dewberry. 2022. Addendum to the Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact) – State Route 168/Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Dewberry. 2022. Air Quality Technical Memorandum for the SR 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Dewberry. 2022. Noise Technical Memorandum for the SR 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Dewberry. 2022. State Route 168/Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project – Addendum to the 2016 Initial Site Assessment.

Dewberry. 2023a. Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report for the Enterprise Canal/State Route 168 Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Dewberry. 2023b. Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report for the Enterprise Canal/State Route 168 Pedestrian Bridge Project, Clovis, Fresno County, California.

Dewberry. 2023c. Finding of No Adverse Effect for the Enterprise Canal/State Route 168 Pedestrian Bridge Project, Clovis, Fresno County, California Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2016. Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment.

LSA Associates, Inc. 2017. Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) – State Route 168/Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Bridge Project.

Note: Many state and federal laws limit the disclosure of sensitive cultural and tribal resource information to the public. Additional information regarding confidentiality of these resources can be found in the Standard Environmental Reference Volume 2 in Section 3.4.13 and Section 5.3.6.

To obtain a copy of one or more of these technical studies/reports or the Initial Study, please send your request to:
545
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project  95 Trais Norris, Senior Environmental Planner
District 6 Environmental Division
California Department of Transportation
2015 E. Shields Avenue, Suite 100
Fresno, CA 93726
Or send your request via email to: [email protected] Or call: (559) 320-6045
Please provide the following information in your request:

Project title: State Route 168 Enterprise Canal Pedestrian Overcrossing Project General location information: City of Clovis, Fresno County, California District number-county code-route-post mile: District 06–FRE–168 EA/Project ID number: EA 06-0U840/EFIS Project ID 0616000055 546
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

Clovis City CouncilMarch 4, 2025

Clovis City Council
March 4, 2025